ID string | Name string | Abstraction string | Structure string | Status string | Diagram string | Description string | ExtendedDescription string | LikelihoodOfExploit string | RelatedWeaknesses list | ApplicablePlatforms list | ModesOfIntroduction list | CommonConsequences list | DetectionMethods list | PotentialMitigations list | DemonstrativeExamples list | ObservedExamples list | TaxonomyMappings list | RelatedAttackPatterns list | References list | Notes list | ContentHistory list | MappingNotes_Usage string | MappingNotes_Rationale string | MappingNotes_Comments string | MappingNotes_Reasons list | MappingNotes_Suggestions list | WeaknessOrdinalities list | AlternateTerms list | AffectedResources list | FunctionalAreas list | BackgroundDetails list | NumPaths int64 | Paths list | Children list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
20 | Improper Input Validation | Class | Simple | Stable | /data/images/CWE-20-Diagram.png | The product receives input or data, but it does
not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the
properties that are required to process the data safely and
correctly. |
Input validation is a frequently-used technique for checking potentially dangerous inputs in order to ensure that the inputs are safe for processing within the code, or when communicating with other components.
Input can consist of:
- raw data - strings, numbers, parameters, file contents, etc.
- metadata - information about the raw data, such as headers or size
Data can be simple or structured. Structured data can be composed of many nested layers, composed of combinations of metadata and raw data, with other simple or structured data.
Many properties of raw data or metadata may need to be validated upon entry into the code, such as:
- specified quantities such as size, length, frequency, price, rate, number of operations, time, etc.
- implied or derived quantities, such as the actual size of a file instead of a specified size
- indexes, offsets, or positions into more complex data structures
- symbolic keys or other elements into hash tables, associative arrays, etc.
- well-formedness, i.e. syntactic correctness - compliance with expected syntax
- lexical token correctness - compliance with rules for what is treated as a token
- specified or derived type - the actual type of the input (or what the input appears to be)
- consistency - between individual data elements, between raw data and metadata, between references, etc.
- conformance to domain-specific rules, e.g. business logic
- equivalence - ensuring that equivalent inputs are treated the same
- authenticity, ownership, or other attestations about the input, e.g. a cryptographic signature to prove the source of the data
Implied or derived properties of data must often be calculated or inferred by the code itself. Errors in deriving properties may be considered a contributing factor to improper input validation. | High | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "\n\nREALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.\n\n\nIf a programmer believes that an attacker cannot modify certain inputs, then the programmer might not perform any input validation... | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker could provide unexpected values and cause a program crash or arbitrary control of resource allocation, leading to excess... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nSome instances of improper input validation can be detected using automated static analysis.\n\n\nA static analysis tool might allow the user to specify which application-specific methods or functions perform input validation; the tool might also have built-in knowledge of validation frame... | [
{
"Description": "Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build \"recognizers\" for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data repres... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This example demonstrates a shopping interaction in which the user is free to specify the quantity of items to be purchased and a total is calculated.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"... | [
{
"Description": "Large language model (LLM) management tool does not validate the format of a digest value (CWE-1287) from a private, untrusted model registry, enabling relative path traversal (CWE-23), a.k.a. Probllama",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-37032",
"Reference": "CVE-2024... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Input validation and representation",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": "A1",
"EntryName": "Unvalidated Input",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2004"
},
{
"EntryID... | [
"10",
"101",
"104",
"108",
"109",
"110",
"120",
"13",
"135",
"136",
"14",
"153",
"182",
"209",
"22",
"23",
"230",
"231",
"24",
"250",
"261",
"267",
"28",
"3",
"31",
"42",
"43",
"45",
"46",
"47",
"473",
"52",
"53",
"588",
"63",
"64",
"664",
"6... | [
{
"Authors": [
"Katrina Tsipenyuk",
"Brian Chess",
"Gary McGraw"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-6",
"Publication": "NIST Workshop on Software Security Assurance Tools Techniques and Metrics",
"PublicationDay": "07",
"PublicationMonth": "11",
"Public... | [
{
"Note": "\n\nCWE-116 and CWE-20 have a close association because, depending on the nature of the structured message, proper input validation can indirectly prevent special characters from changing the meaning of a structured message. For example, by validating that a numeric ID field should only contain the 0... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | CWE-20 is commonly misused in low-information vulnerability reports when lower-level CWEs could be used instead, or when more details about the vulnerability are available [REF-1287]. It is not useful for trend analysis. It is also a level-1 Class (i.e., a child of a Pillar). Finally, it is often used when the root cause issue is related to how input is incorrectly transformed, instead of "validated" to be correct as-is. | Within CWE, the "input validation" term focuses on the act of checking whether an input is already safe, which is different from other techniques that ensure safe processing of input. Carefully perform root-cause analysis to be sure that the issue is not due to techniques that attempt to transform potentially-dangerous input into something safe, such as filtering (CWE-790) - which attempts to remove dangerous inputs - or encoding/escaping (CWE-116), which attempts to ensure that the input is not misinterpreted when it is included in output to another component. If the issue is truly due to imroper input validation, consider using lower-level children such as Improper Use of Validation Framework (CWE-1173) or improper validation involving specific types or properties of input such as Specified Quantity (CWE-1284); Specified Index, Position, or Offset (CWE-1285); Syntactic Correctness (CWE-1286); Specified Type (CWE-1287); Consistency within Input (CWE-1288); or Unsafe Equivalence (CWE-1289). | [
"Frequent Misuse",
"Frequent Misinterpretation",
"Abstraction"
] | [
{
"Comment": "Specified Quantity",
"CweID": "1284"
},
{
"Comment": "Specified Index, Position, or Offset",
"CweID": "1285"
},
{
"Comment": "Syntactic Correctness",
"CweID": "1286"
},
{
"Comment": "Specified Type",
"CweID": "1287"
},
{
"Comment": "Consistency withi... | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"20"
]
] | [
"1284",
"129"
] |
1284 | Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product receives input that is expected to specify a quantity (such as size or length), but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the quantity has the required properties. |
Specified quantities include size, length, frequency, price, rate, number of operations, time, and others. Code may rely on specified quantities to allocate resources, perform calculations, control iteration, etc. When the quantity is not properly validated, then attackers can specify malicious quantities to cause excessive resource allocation, trigger unexpected failures, enable buffer overflows, etc.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "20",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Varies by Context"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Since quantities are used so often to affect resource allocation or process financial data, they are often present in many places in the code.",
"Scope": [
"Other"
]
}
] | null | [
{
"Description": "\n\nAssume all input is malicious. Use an \"accept known good\" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.\n\n\nWhen perfo... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This example demonstrates a shopping interaction in which the user is free to specify the quantity of items to be purchased and a total is calculated.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"... | [
{
"Description": "Chain: Python library does not limit the resources used to process images that specify a very large number of bands (CWE-1284), leading to excessive memory consumption (CWE-789) or an integer overflow (CWE-190).",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-21668",
"Reference": ... | null | null | null | [
{
"Note": "This entry is still under development and will continue to see updates and content improvements.",
"Type": "Maintenance"
}
] | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"20",
"1284"
]
] | [] |
129 | Improper Validation of Array Index | Variant | Simple | Draft | null | The product uses untrusted input when calculating or using an array index, but the product does not validate or incorrectly validates the index to ensure the index references a valid position within the array. | null | High | [
{
"CweID": "20",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C++",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Use of an index that is outside the bounds of an array will very likely result in the corruption of relevant memory and perhaps instructions, leading to a crash, if the values are outside of the valid memory area.",
... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThis weakness can often be detected using automated static analysis tools. Many modern tools use data flow analysis or constraint-based techniques to minimize the number of false positives.\n\n\nAutomated static analysis generally does not account for environmental considerations when repo... | [
{
"Description": "Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).",
"Effectiveness": null,
... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In the code snippet below, an untrusted integer value is used to reference an object in an array.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText":... | [
{
"Description": "large ID in packet used as array index",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2005-0369",
"Reference": "CVE-2005-0369"
},
{
"Description": "negative array index as argument to POP LIST command",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2001-1009",
"Referen... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Unchecked array indexing",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CLASP"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "INDEX - Array index overflow",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "ARR00-C",
"EntryName": "Understand ... | [
"100"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc"
],
"Edition": "2nd Edition",
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-7",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "04",
"PublicationMonth": "12",
"PublicationYear": "2002",
"Publisher": "Microsoft Press",
"Section": "Chapter 5, \... | [
{
"Note": "This weakness can precede uncontrolled memory allocation (CWE-789) in languages that automatically expand an array when an index is used that is larger than the size of the array, such as JavaScript.",
"Type": "Relationship"
},
{
"Note": "An improperly validated array index might lead dir... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Variant level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": "The most common condition situation leading to an out-of-bounds array index is the use of loop index variables as buffer indexes. If the end condition for the loop is subject to a flaw, the index can grow or shrink unbounded, therefore causing a buffer overflow or underflow. Another common sit... | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "out-of-bounds array index"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "index-out-of-range"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "array index underflow"
}
] | [
"Memory"
] | null | null | 1 | [
[
"20",
"129"
]
] | [] |
74 | Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component ('Injection') | Class | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product constructs all or part of a command, data structure, or record using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify how it is parsed or interpreted when it is sent to a downstream component. | Software or other automated logic has certain assumptions about what constitutes data and control respectively. It is the lack of verification of these assumptions for user-controlled input that leads to injection problems. Injection problems encompass a wide variety of issues -- all mitigated in very different ways and usually attempted in order to alter the control flow of the process. For this reason, the most effective way to discuss these weaknesses is to note the distinct features that classify them as injection weaknesses. The most important issue to note is that all injection problems share one thing in common -- i.e., they allow for the injection of control plane data into the user-controlled data plane. This means that the execution of the process may be altered by sending code in through legitimate data channels, using no other mechanism. While buffer overflows, and many other flaws, involve the use of some further issue to gain execution, injection problems need only for the data to be parsed. | High | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Many injection attacks involve the disclosure of important information -- in terms of both data sensitivity and usefulness in further exploitation.",
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
]
},
{
"Impact": [
... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Programming languages and supporting technologies might be chosen which are not subject to these issues.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Requirements"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Description": "Utilize a... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This example code intends to take the name of a user and list the contents of that user's home directory. It is subject to the first variant of OS command injection.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": ... | [
{
"Description": "API service using a large generative AI model allows direct prompt injection to leak hard-coded system prompts or execute other prompts.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-5184",
"Reference": "CVE-2024-5184"
},
{
"Description": "Python-based dependency managem... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Injection problem ('data' used as something else)",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CLASP"
},
{
"EntryID": "A6",
"EntryName": "Injection Flaws",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2004"
},
{
"EntryID": "... | [
"10",
"101",
"105",
"108",
"120",
"13",
"135",
"14",
"24",
"250",
"267",
"273",
"28",
"3",
"34",
"42",
"43",
"45",
"46",
"47",
"51",
"52",
"53",
"6",
"64",
"67",
"7",
"71",
"72",
"76",
"78",
"79",
"8",
"80",
"83",
"84",
"9"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Secure Software, Inc."
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-18",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2005",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "The CLASP Application Security... | [
{
"Note": "Many people treat injection only as an input validation problem (CWE-20) because many people do not distinguish between the consequence/attack (injection) and the protection mechanism that prevents the attack from succeeding. However, input validation is only one potential protection mechanism (outpu... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | CWE-74 is high-level and often misused when lower-level weaknesses are more appropriate. | Examine the children and descendants of this entry to find a more precise mapping. | [
"Frequent Misuse",
"Abstraction"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
}
] | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"74"
]
] | [
"1236",
"77",
"78",
"79",
"88",
"89",
"91",
"917",
"94"
] |
1236 | Improper Neutralization of Formula Elements in a CSV File | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product saves user-provided information into a Comma-Separated Value (CSV) file, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could be interpreted as a command when the file is opened by a spreadsheet product. | User-provided data is often saved to traditional databases. This data can be exported to a CSV file, which allows users to read the data using spreadsheet software such as Excel, Numbers, or Calc. This software interprets entries beginning with '=' as formulas, which are then executed by the spreadsheet software. The software's formula language often allows methods to access hyperlinks or the local command line, and frequently allows enough characters to invoke an entire script. Attackers can populate data fields which, when saved to a CSV file, may attempt information exfiltration or other malicious activity when automatically executed by the spreadsheet software. | null | [
{
"CweID": "74",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Not OS-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Operating_System"
},
{
"Class": "Not Architecture-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Pre... | [
{
"Note": "The weakness is in the implementation of a software's CSV export feature, in particular how it formats formula entries as the output gets flattened into a text file.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data",
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": [
"Low"
],
"Note": "Current versions of Excel warn users of untrusted content.",
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
]
}
] | null | [
{
"Description": "When generating CSV output, ensure that formula-sensitive metacharacters are effectively escaped or removed from all data before storage in the resultant CSV. Risky characters include '=' (equal), '+' (plus), '-' (minus), and '@' (at).",
"Effectiveness": "Moderate",
"EffectivenessNotes... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "Hyperlinks or other commands can be executed when a cell begins with the formula identifier, '='",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": ... | [
{
"Description": "Low privileged user can trigger CSV injection through a contact form field value",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2019-12134",
"Reference": "CVE-2019-12134"
},
{
"Description": "Cloud management product allows arbitrary command execution via CSV injection",
"... | null | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"OWASP"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-21",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "02",
"PublicationMonth": "02",
"PublicationYear": "2020",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "CSV Injection",
"URL": "https://owasp.org/... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "CSV Injection"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Formula Injection"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Excel Macro Injection"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"74",
"1236"
]
] | [] |
77 | Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection') | Class | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-77-Diagram.png | The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component. |
Many protocols and products have their own custom command language. While OS or shell command strings are frequently discovered and targeted, developers may not realize that these other command languages might also be vulnerable to attacks.
| High | [
{
"CweID": "74",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "AI/ML",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "\n\nCommand injection vulnerabilities typically occur when:\n\n\n 1. Data enters the application from an untrusted source.\n\n 1. The data is part of a string that is executed as a command by the application.\n\n",
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is ca... | [
{
"Impact": [
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If a malicious user injects a character (such as a semi-colon) that delimits the end of one command and the beginning of another, it may be possible to then insert an entirely new and unrelated command that w... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Descriptio... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "Consider a \"CWE Differentiator\" application that uses an an LLM generative AI based \"chatbot\" to explain the difference between two weaknesses. As input, it accepts two CWE IDs, constructs a prompt string, se... | [
{
"Description": "injection of sed script syntax (\"sed injection\")",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-1509",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-1509"
},
{
"Description": "API service using a large generative AI model allows direct prompt injection to leak hard-coded system prompts or exe... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Command Injection",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Command injection",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CLASP"
},
{
"EntryID": "A2",
"EntryName": "Injection Flaws",
... | [
"136",
"15",
"183",
"248",
"40",
"43",
"75",
"76"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Katrina Tsipenyuk",
"Brian Chess",
"Gary McGraw"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-6",
"Publication": "NIST Workshop on Software Security Assurance Tools Techniques and Metrics",
"PublicationDay": "07",
"PublicationMonth": "11",
"Public... | [
{
"Note": "\n\nThe \"command injection\" phrase carries different meanings, either as an attack or as a technical impact. The most common usage of \"command injection\" refers to the more-accurate OS command injection (CWE-78), but there are many command languages.\n\n\nIn vulnerability-focused analysis, the ph... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | CWE-77 is often misused when OS command injection (CWE-78) was intended instead [REF-1287]. | Ensure that the analysis focuses on the root-cause error that allows the execution of commands, as there are many weaknesses that can lead to this consequence. See Terminology Notes. If the weakness involves a command language besides OS shell invocation, then CWE-77 could be used. | [
"Frequent Misuse"
] | [
{
"Comment": "OS Command Injection",
"CweID": "78"
}
] | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
}
] | [
{
"Description": "an attack-oriented phrase for this weakness. Note: often used when \"OS command injection\" (CWE-78) was intended.",
"Term": "Command injection"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"74",
"77"
]
] | [] |
78 | Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') | Base | Simple | Stable | /data/images/CWE-78-Diagram.png | The product constructs all or part of an OS command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended OS command when it is sent to a downstream component. |
This weakness can lead to a vulnerability in environments in which the attacker does not have direct access to the operating system, such as in web applications. Alternately, if the weakness occurs in a privileged program, it could allow the attacker to specify commands that normally would not be accessible, or to call alternate commands with privileges that the attacker does not have. The problem is exacerbated if the compromised process does not follow the principle of least privilege, because the attacker-controlled commands may run with special system privileges that increases the amount of damage.
There are at least two subtypes of OS command injection:
- The application intends to execute a single, fixed program that is under its own control. It intends to use externally-supplied inputs as arguments to that program. For example, the program might use system("nslookup [HOSTNAME]") to run nslookup and allow the user to supply a HOSTNAME, which is used as an argument. Attackers cannot prevent nslookup from executing. However, if the program does not remove command separators from the HOSTNAME argument, attackers could place the separators into the arguments, which allows them to execute their own program after nslookup has finished executing.
- The application accepts an input that it uses to fully select which program to run, as well as which commands to use. The application simply redirects this entire command to the operating system. For example, the program might use "exec([COMMAND])" to execute the [COMMAND] that was supplied by the user. If the COMMAND is under attacker control, then the attacker can execute arbitrary commands or programs. If the command is being executed using functions like exec() and CreateProcess(), the attacker might not be able to combine multiple commands together in the same line.
From a weakness standpoint, these variants represent distinct programmer errors. In the first variant, the programmer clearly intends that input from untrusted parties will be part of the arguments in the command to be executed. In the second variant, the programmer does not intend for the command to be accessible to any untrusted party, but the programmer probably has not accounted for alternate ways in which malicious attackers can provide input. | High | [
{
"CweID": "74",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands",
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart",
"Read Files or Directories",
"Modify Files or Directories",
"Read Application Data",
"Modify Application Data",
"Hide Activities"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Attackers... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThis weakness can often be detected using automated static analysis tools. Many modern tools use data flow analysis or constraint-based techniques to minimize the number of false positives.\n\n\nAutomated static analysis might not be able to recognize when proper input validation is being ... | [
{
"Description": "If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Descriptio... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This example code intends to take the name of a user and list the contents of that user's home directory. It is subject to the first variant of OS command injection.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": ... | [
{
"Description": "OS command injection in Wi-Fi router, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2020-10987",
"Reference": "CVE-2020-10987"
},
{
"Description": "Template functionality in network configuration management tool allows OS command injecti... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "OS Command Injection",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "A3",
"EntryName": "Malicious File Execution",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2007"
},
{
"EntryID": "A6",
"EntryName... | [
"108",
"15",
"43",
"6",
"88"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Greg Hoglund",
"Gary McGraw"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-140",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "27",
"PublicationMonth": "02",
"PublicationYear": "2004",
"Publisher": "Addison-Wesley",
"Section": null,
"Title": "Explo... | [
{
"Note": "The \"OS command injection\" phrase carries different meanings to different people. For some people, it only refers to cases in which the attacker injects command separators into arguments for an application-controlled program that is being invoked. For some people, it refers to any type of attack th... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Shell injection"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Shell metacharacters"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "OS Command Injection"
}
] | [
"System Process"
] | [
"Program Invocation"
] | null | 1 | [
[
"74",
"78"
]
] | [] |
79 | Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') | Base | Simple | Stable | /data/images/CWE-79-Diagram.png | The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users. |
There are many variants of cross-site scripting, characterized by a variety of terms or involving different attack topologies. However, they all indicate the same fundamental weakness: improper neutralization of dangerous input between the adversary and a victim.
| High | [
{
"CweID": "74",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Web Based",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Bypass Protection Mechanism",
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "The most common attack performed with cross-site scripting involves the disclosure of private information stored in user cookies, such as session information. Typically, a malicious user ... | [
{
"Description": "Use automated static analysis tools that target this type of weakness. Many modern techniques use data flow analysis to minimize the number of false positives. This is not a perfect solution, since 100% accuracy and coverage are not feasible, especially when multiple components are involved.",... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.\n\n\nExamples of libraries and frameworks that make it easier to generate properly encoded output include Microsoft's Anti-XSS library, the OWASP ESA... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code displays a welcome message on a web page based on the HTTP GET username parameter (covers a Reflected XSS (Type 1) scenario).",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Refere... | [
{
"Description": "Python Library Manager did not sufficiently neutralize a user-supplied search term, allowing reflected XSS.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-25926",
"Reference": "CVE-2021-25926"
},
{
"Description": "Python-based e-commerce platform did not escape returned c... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Cross-site scripting (XSS)",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Cross-site Scripting",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Cross-... | [
"209",
"588",
"591",
"592",
"63",
"85"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Jeremiah Grossman",
"Robert \"RSnake\" Hansen",
"Petko \"pdp\" D. Petkov",
"Anton Rager",
"Seth Fogie"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-709",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"Publicati... | [
{
"Note": "\n\nThe attack methods for XSS can vary depending on the type of XSS and the attacker’s goal.\n\n\nReflected XSS exploits (Type 1)\n\n occur when an attacker causes a victim to supply dangerous content to a vulnerable web application, which is then reflected back to the victim and executed by the web... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Resultant"
}
] | [
{
"Description": "A common abbreviation for Cross-Site Scripting.",
"Term": "XSS"
},
{
"Description": "Used as a synonym of stored (Type 2) XSS.",
"Term": "HTML Injection"
},
{
"Description": "Used when a server application reads data directly from the HTTP request and reflects it back i... | null | null | [
"\n\nThe Same Origin Policy states that browsers should limit the resources accessible to scripts running on a given web site, or \"origin\", to the resources associated with that web site on the client-side, and not the client-side resources of any other sites or \"origins\". The goal is to prevent one site from b... | 1 | [
[
"74",
"79"
]
] | [] |
88 | Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection') | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product constructs a string for a command to be executed by a separate component
in another control sphere, but it does not properly delimit the
intended arguments, options, or switches within that command string. |
When creating commands using interpolation into a string, developers may assume that only the arguments/options that they specify will be processed. This assumption may be even stronger when the programmer has encoded the command in a way that prevents separate commands from being provided maliciously, e.g. in the case of shell metacharacters. When constructing the command, the developer may use whitespace or other delimiters that are required to separate arguments when the command. However, if an attacker can provide an untrusted input that contains argument-separating delimiters, then the resulting command will have more arguments than intended by the developer. The attacker may then be able to change the behavior of the command. Depending on the functionality supported by the extraneous arguments, this may have security-relevant consequences.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "74",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "PHP",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands",
"Alter Execution Logic",
"Read Application Data",
"Modify Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker could include arguments that allow unintended commands or code to be executed, allow sensitive data t... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Where possible, avoid building a single string that contains the command and its arguments. Some languages or frameworks have functions that support specifying independent arguments, e.g. as an array, which is used to automatically perform the appropriate quoting or escaping while building the... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "Consider the following program. It intends to perform an \"ls -l\" on an input filename. The validate_name() subroutine performs validation on the input to make sure that only alphanumeric and \"-\" characters ar... | [
{
"Description": "Python-based dependency management tool avoids OS command injection when generating Git commands but allows injection of optional arguments with input beginning with a dash (CWE-88), potentially allowing for code execution.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-36069",
"... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Argument Injection or Modification",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "ENV03-C",
"EntryName": "Sanitize the environment when invoking external programs",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CERT C Secure Coding"
},
... | [
"137",
"174",
"41",
"460",
"88"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Steven Christey"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-859",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Argument injection issues",
"URL"... | [
{
"Note": "At one layer of abstraction, this can overlap other weaknesses that have whitespace problems, e.g. injection of javascript into attributes of HTML tags.",
"Type": "Relationship"
}
] | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
}
] | null | [
"System Process"
] | null | null | 1 | [
[
"74",
"88"
]
] | [] |
89 | Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') | Base | Simple | Stable | /data/images/CWE-89-Diagram.png | The product constructs all or part of an SQL command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended SQL command when it is sent to a downstream component. Without sufficient removal or quoting of SQL syntax in user-controllable inputs, the generated SQL query can cause those inputs to be interpreted as SQL instead of ordinary user data. | null | High | [
{
"CweID": "74",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "SQL",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "Database Server",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type":... | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": "This weakness typically appears in data-rich applications that save user inputs in a database.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Adversaries could execute system commands, typically by changing the SQL statement to redirect output to a file that can then be executed.",
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality",
"Integrity",
"A... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThis weakness can often be detected using automated static analysis tools. Many modern tools use data flow analysis or constraint-based techniques to minimize the number of false positives.\n\n\nAutomated static analysis might not be able to recognize when proper input validation is being ... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.\n\n\nFor example, consider using persistence layers such as Hibernate or Enterprise Java Beans, which can provide significant protection against SQL ... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In 2008, a large number of web servers were compromised using the same SQL injection attack string. This single string worked against many different programs. The SQL injection was then used to modify the web sit... | [
{
"Description": "SQL injection in security product dashboard using crafted certificate fields",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-32530",
"Reference": "CVE-2023-32530"
},
{
"Description": "SQL injection in time and billing software, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV.",
... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "SQL injection",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "SQL Injection",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "SQL injection",
"Mappi... | [
"108",
"109",
"110",
"470",
"66",
"7"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"rain.forest.puppy"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-1460",
"Publication": "Phrack Issue 54, Volume 8",
"PublicationDay": "25",
"PublicationMonth": "12",
"PublicationYear": "1998",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "NT Web Te... | [
{
"Note": "SQL injection can be resultant from special character mismanagement, MAID, or denylist/allowlist problems. It can be primary to authentication errors.",
"Type": "Relationship"
}
] | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": "a common attack-oriented phrase",
"Term": "SQL injection"
},
{
"Description": "a common abbreviation for \"SQL injection\"",
"Term": "SQLi"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"74",
"89"
]
] | [] |
91 | XML Injection (aka Blind XPath Injection) | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not properly neutralize special elements that are used in XML, allowing attackers to modify the syntax, content, or commands of the XML before it is processed by an end system. | Within XML, special elements could include reserved words or characters such as "<", ">", """, and "&", which could then be used to add new data or modify XML syntax. | null | [
{
"CweID": "74",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands",
"Read Application Data",
"Modify Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality",
"Integrity",
"Availability"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nAssume all input is malicious. Use an \"accept known good\" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.\n\n\nWhen perfo... | null | null | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "XML injection (aka Blind Xpath injection)",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "A2",
"EntryName": "Injection Flaws",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2007"
},
{
"EntryID": "A6",
... | [
"250",
"83"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Amit Klein"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-882",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "19",
"PublicationMonth": "05",
"PublicationYear": "2004",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Blind XPath Injection",
"URL": "http... | [
{
"Note": "The description for this entry is generally applicable to XML, but the name includes \"blind XPath injection\" which is more closely associated with CWE-643. Therefore this entry might need to be deprecated or converted to a general category - although injection into raw XML is not covered by CWE-643... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"74",
"91"
]
] | [] |
917 | Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an Expression Language Statement ('Expression Language Injection') | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product constructs all or part of an expression language (EL) statement in a framework such as a Java Server Page (JSP) using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended EL statement before it is executed. | Frameworks such as Java Server Page (JSP) allow a developer to insert executable expressions within otherwise-static content. When the developer is not aware of the executable nature of these expressions and/or does not disable them, then if an attacker can inject expressions, this could lead to code execution or other unexpected behaviors. | null | [
{
"CweID": "74",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "Java",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
]
},
{
"Impact": [
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Integrity"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Avoid adding user-controlled data into an expression interpreter when possible.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Description": "\n\nIf user-controlled ... | null | [
{
"Description": "Product does not neutralize ${xyz} style expressions, allowing remote code execution. (log4shell vulnerability in log4j)",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-44228",
"Reference": "CVE-2021-44228"
}
] | null | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"Stefano Di Paola",
"Arshan Dabirsiaghi"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-911",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "12",
"PublicationMonth": "09",
"PublicationYear": "2011",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Expres... | [
{
"Note": "The interrelationships and differences between CWE-917 and CWE-1336 need to be further clarified.",
"Type": "Maintenance"
},
{
"Note": "In certain versions of Spring 3.0.5 and earlier, there was a vulnerability (CVE-2011-2730) in which Expression Language tags would be evaluated twice, wh... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
}
] | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "EL Injection"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"74",
"917"
]
] | [] |
94 | Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') | Base | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-94-Diagram.png | The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment. | null | Medium | [
{
"CweID": "74",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Interpreted",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Sometimes",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "AI/ML",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Bypass Protection Mechanism"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "In some cases, injectable code controls authentication; this may lead to a remote vulnerability.",
"Scope": [
"Access Control"
]
},
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity"
],
... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Description": "\n\nRun your code in a \"ja... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This example attempts to write user messages to a message file and allow users to view them.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null... | [
{
"Description": "Math component in an LLM framework translates user input into a Python expression that is input into the Python exec() method, allowing code execution - one variant of a \"prompt injection\" attack.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-29374",
"Reference": "CVE-2023-293... | [
{
"EntryID": "CODE",
"EntryName": "Code Evaluation and Injection",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "Part 4-2",
"EntryName": "Req CR 3.5",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "ISA/IEC 62443"
},
{
"EntryID": "Part 3-3",
"EntryName": "Req SR ... | [
"242",
"35",
"77"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc",
"John Viega"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-44",
"Publication": "McGraw-Hill",
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2010",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "\"Si... | [
{
"Note": "\n\nInjection problems encompass a wide variety of issues -- all mitigated in very different ways. For this reason, the most effective way to discuss these weaknesses is to note the distinct features that classify them as injection weaknesses. The most important issue to note is that all injection pr... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This entry is frequently misused for vulnerabilities with a technical impact of "code execution," which does not by itself indicate a root cause weakness, since dozens of weaknesses can enable code execution. | This weakness only applies when the product's functionality intentionally constructs all or part of a code segment. It could be that executing code could be the result of other weaknesses that do not involve the construction of code segments. | [
"Frequent Misuse",
"Frequent Misinterpretation"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Code Injection"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"74",
"94"
]
] | [] |
116 | Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product prepares a structured message for communication with another component, but encoding or escaping of the data is either missing or done incorrectly. As a result, the intended structure of the message is not preserved. |
Improper encoding or escaping can allow attackers to change the commands that are sent to another component, inserting malicious commands instead.
Most products follow a certain protocol that uses structured messages for communication between components, such as queries or commands. These structured messages can contain raw data interspersed with metadata or control information. For example, "GET /index.html HTTP/1.1" is a structured message containing a command ("GET") with a single argument ("/index.html") and metadata about which protocol version is being used ("HTTP/1.1").
If an application uses attacker-supplied inputs to construct a structured message without properly encoding or escaping, then the attacker could insert special characters that will cause the data to be interpreted as control information or metadata. Consequently, the component that receives the output will perform the wrong operations, or otherwise interpret the data incorrectly.
| High | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "AI/ML",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "Database Server",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "T... | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Operation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "The communications between components can be modified in unexpected ways. Unexpected commands can be executed, bypassing other security mechanisms. Incoming data can be misinterpreted.",
"Scope": [
"Integrity"
... | [
{
"Description": "This weakness can often be detected using automated static analysis tools. Many modern tools use data flow analysis or constraint-based techniques to minimize the number of false positives.",
"DetectionMethodID": "DM-1",
"Effectiveness": "Moderate",
"EffectivenessNotes": "This is n... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.\n\n\nFor example, consider using the ESAPI Encoding control [REF-45] or a similar tool, library, or framework. These will help the programmer encode ... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code displays an email address that was submitted as part of a form.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleC... | [
{
"Description": "Chain: authentication routine in Go-based agile development product does not escape user name (CWE-116), allowing LDAP injection (CWE-90)",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-41232",
"Reference": "CVE-2021-41232"
},
{
"Description": "OS command injection in back... | [
{
"EntryID": "22",
"EntryName": "Improper Output Handling",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "WASC"
},
{
"EntryID": "IDS00-J",
"EntryName": "Sanitize untrusted data passed across a trust boundary",
"MappingFit": "Exact",
"TaxonomyName": "The CERT Oracle Secure Coding Standard ... | [
"104",
"73",
"81",
"85"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"OWASP"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-45",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "OWASP Enterprise Security API (ESAPI) Project",
... | [
{
"Note": "This weakness is primary to all weaknesses related to injection (CWE-74) since the inherent nature of injection involves the violation of structured messages.",
"Type": "Relationship"
},
{
"Note": "\n\nCWE-116 and CWE-20 have a close association because, depending on the nature of the str... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Output Sanitization"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Output Validation"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Output Encoding"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"116"
]
] | [
"838"
] |
838 | Inappropriate Encoding for Output Context | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product uses or specifies an encoding when generating output to a downstream component, but the specified encoding is not the same as the encoding that is expected by the downstream component. |
This weakness can cause the downstream component to use a decoding method that produces different data than what the product intended to send. When the wrong encoding is used - even if closely related - the downstream component could decode the data incorrectly. This can have security consequences when the provided boundaries between control and data are inadvertently broken, because the resulting data could introduce control characters or special elements that were not sent by the product. The resulting data could then be used to bypass protection mechanisms such as input validation, and enable injection attacks.
While using output encoding is essential for ensuring that communications between components are accurate, the use of the wrong encoding - even if closely related - could cause the downstream component to misinterpret the output.
For example, HTML entity encoding is used for elements in the HTML body of a web page. However, a programmer might use entity encoding when generating output for that is used within an attribute of an HTML tag, which could contain functional Javascript that is not affected by the HTML encoding.
While web applications have received the most attention for this problem, this weakness could potentially apply to any type of product that uses a communications stream that could support multiple encodings.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "116",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | null | [
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Application Data",
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker could modify the structure of the message or data being sent to the downstream component, possibly injecting commands.",
"Scope": [
"Integrity",
"C... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Use context-aware encoding. That is, understand which encoding is being used by the downstream component, and ensure that this encoding is used. If an encoding can be specified, do so, instead of assuming that the default encoding is the same as the default being assumed by the downstream comp... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code dynamically builds an HTML page using POST data:",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "```\n\t$... | [
{
"Description": "Server does not properly handle requests that do not contain UTF-8 data; browser assumes UTF-8, allowing XSS.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2009-2814",
"Reference": "CVE-2009-2814"
}
] | [
{
"EntryID": "IDS13-J",
"EntryName": "Use compatible encodings on both sides of file or network IO",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "The CERT Oracle Secure Coding Standard for Java (2011)"
}
] | [
"468"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Jim Manico"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-786",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "30",
"PublicationMonth": "06",
"PublicationYear": "2010",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Injection-safe templating languages",
... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"116",
"838"
]
] | [] |
119 | Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer | Class | Simple | Stable | /data/images/CWE-119-Diagram.png | The product performs operations on a memory buffer, but it reads from or writes to a memory location outside the buffer's intended boundary. This may result in read or write operations on unexpected memory locations that could be linked to other variables, data structures, or internal program data. | null | High | [] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C++",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Assembly",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands",
"Modify Memory"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If the memory accessible by the attacker can be effectively controlled, it may be possible to execute arbitrary code, as with a standard buffer overflow. If the attacker can overwrite a... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThis weakness can often be detected using automated static analysis tools. Many modern tools use data flow analysis or constraint-based techniques to minimize the number of false positives.\n\n\nAutomated static analysis generally does not account for environmental considerations when repo... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.\n\n\nFor example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and ... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This example takes an IP address from a user, verifies that it is well formed and then looks up the hostname and copies it into a buffer.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": n... | [
{
"Description": "Incorrect URI normalization in application traffic product leads to buffer overflow, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-22991",
"Reference": "CVE-2021-22991"
},
{
"Description": "Buffer overflow in Wi-Fi router web interf... | [
{
"EntryID": "A5",
"EntryName": "Buffer Overflows",
"MappingFit": "Exact",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2004"
},
{
"EntryID": "ARR00-C",
"EntryName": "Understand how arrays work",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CERT C Secure Coding"
},
{
"EntryID": "ARR30-C",
... | [
"10",
"100",
"123",
"14",
"24",
"42",
"44",
"45",
"46",
"47",
"8",
"9"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Aleph One"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-1029",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "08",
"PublicationMonth": "11",
"PublicationYear": "1996",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Smashing The Stack For Fun And Profit",
... | [
{
"Note": "\n\nIt is possible in any programming languages without memory management support to attempt an operation outside of the bounds of a memory buffer, but the consequences will vary widely depending on the language, platform, and chip architecture.\n",
"Type": "Applicable Platform"
}
] | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | CWE-119 is commonly misused in low-information vulnerability reports when lower-level CWEs could be used instead, or when more details about the vulnerability are available. | Look at CWE-119's children and consider mapping to CWEs such as CWE-787: Out-of-bounds Write, CWE-125: Out-of-bounds Read, or others. | [
"Frequent Misuse"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": "This term has many different meanings to different audiences. From a CWE mapping perspective, this term should be avoided where possible. Some researchers, developers, and tools intend for it to mean \"write past the end of a buffer,\" whereas others use the same term to mean \"any read or wri... | [
"Memory"
] | null | [
"Certain languages allow direct addressing of memory locations and do not automatically ensure that these locations are valid for the memory buffer that is being referenced."
] | 1 | [
[
"119"
]
] | [
"120",
"125",
"787",
"824"
] |
120 | Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow') | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product copies an input buffer to an output buffer without verifying that the size of the input buffer is less than the size of the output buffer, leading to a buffer overflow. | A buffer overflow condition exists when a product attempts to put more data in a buffer than it can hold, or when it attempts to put data in a memory area outside of the boundaries of a buffer. The simplest type of error, and the most common cause of buffer overflows, is the "classic" case in which the product copies the buffer without restricting how much is copied. Other variants exist, but the existence of a classic overflow strongly suggests that the programmer is not considering even the most basic of security protections. | High | [
{
"CweID": "119",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C++",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Assembly",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Memory",
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Buffer overflows often can be used to execute arbitrary code, which is usually outside the scope of the product's implicit security policy. This can often be used to subvert any other s... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThis weakness can often be detected using automated static analysis tools. Many modern tools use data flow analysis or constraint-based techniques to minimize the number of false positives.\n\n\nAutomated static analysis generally does not account for environmental considerations when repo... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.\n\n\nFor example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and ... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code asks the user to enter their last name and then attempts to store the value entered in the last_name array.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
}... | [
{
"Description": "buffer overflow using command with long argument",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2000-1094",
"Reference": "CVE-2000-1094"
},
{
"Description": "buffer overflow in local program using long environment variable",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-19... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Unbounded Transfer ('classic overflow')",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Buffer Overflow",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName":... | [
"10",
"100",
"14",
"24",
"42",
"44",
"45",
"46",
"47",
"67",
"8",
"9",
"92"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc"
],
"Edition": "2nd Edition",
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-7",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "04",
"PublicationMonth": "12",
"PublicationYear": "2002",
"Publisher": "Microsoft Press",
"Section": "Chapter 5, \... | [
{
"Note": "At the code level, stack-based and heap-based overflows do not differ significantly, so there usually is not a need to distinguish them. From the attacker perspective, they can be quite different, since different techniques are required to exploit them.",
"Type": "Relationship"
},
{
"Note... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | There are some indications that this CWE ID might be misused and selected simply because it mentions "buffer overflow" - an increasingly vague term. This CWE entry is only appropriate for "Buffer Copy" operations (not buffer reads), in which where there is no "Checking [the] Size of Input", and (by implication of the copy) writing past the end of the buffer. | If the vulnerability being analyzed involves out-of-bounds reads, then consider CWE-125 or descendants. For root cause analysis: if there is any input validation, consider children of CWE-20 such as CWE-1284. If there is a calculation error for buffer sizes, consider CWE-131 or similar. | [
"Frequent Misuse"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Resultant"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
}
] | [
{
"Description": "This term was frequently used by vulnerability researchers during approximately 1995 to 2005 to differentiate buffer copies without length checks (which had been known about for decades) from other emerging weaknesses that still involved invalid accesses of buffers, as vulnerability researcher... | [
"Memory"
] | [
"Memory Management"
] | null | 1 | [
[
"119",
"120"
]
] | [] |
125 | Out-of-bounds Read | Base | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-125-Diagram.png | The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer. | null | null | [
{
"CweID": "119",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C++",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "ICS/OT",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Memory"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker could get secret values such as cryptographic keys, PII, memory addresses, or other information that could be used in additional attacks.",
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
]
},
{
"Impact": [
"Bypas... | [
{
"Description": "Fuzz testing (fuzzing) is a powerful technique for generating large numbers of diverse inputs - either randomly or algorithmically - and dynamically invoking the code with those inputs. Even with random inputs, it is often capable of generating unexpected results such as crashes, memory corrup... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nAssume all input is malicious. Use an \"accept known good\" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.\n\n\nWhen perfo... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In the following code, the method retrieves a value from an array at a specific array index location that is given as an input parameter to the method",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"... | [
{
"Description": "The reference implementation code for a Trusted Platform Module does not implement length checks on data, allowing for an attacker to read 2 bytes past the end of a buffer.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-1018",
"Reference": "CVE-2023-1018"
},
{
"Descriptio... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Out-of-bounds Read",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "ARR30-C",
"EntryName": "Do not form or use out-of-bounds pointers or array subscripts",
"MappingFit": "Imprecise",
"TaxonomyName": "CERT C Secure Coding"
},
{
... | [
"540"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Raoul Strackx",
"Yves Younan",
"Pieter Philippaerts",
"Frank Piessens",
"Sven Lachmund",
"Thomas Walter"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-1034",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "31",
"PublicationMonth": "03",
"... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": "When an out-of-bounds read occurs, typically the product has already made a separate mistake, such as modifying an index or performing pointer arithmetic that produces an out-of-bounds address.",
"Ordinality": "Resultant"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Shorthand for \"Out of bounds\" read",
"Term": "OOB read"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"119",
"125"
]
] | [] |
787 | Out-of-bounds Write | Base | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-787-Diagram.png | The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer. | null | High | [
{
"CweID": "119",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C++",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Assembly",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": ... | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Memory",
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Write operations could cause memory corruption. In some cases, an adversary can modify control data such as return addresses in order to execute unexpected code.",
"Scope": [
... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThis weakness can often be detected using automated static analysis tools. Many modern tools use data flow analysis or constraint-based techniques to minimize the number of false positives.\n\n\nAutomated static analysis generally does not account for environmental considerations when repo... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.\n\n\nFor example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and ... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code attempts to save four different identification numbers into an array.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
... | [
{
"Description": "Font rendering library does not properly handle assigning a signed short value to an unsigned long (CWE-195), leading to an integer wraparound (CWE-190), causing too small of a buffer (CWE-131), leading to an out-of-bounds write (CWE-787).",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-20... | [
{
"EntryID": "Part 3-3",
"EntryName": "Req SR 3.5",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "ISA/IEC 62443"
},
{
"EntryID": "Part 4-1",
"EntryName": "Req SI-1",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "ISA/IEC 62443"
},
{
"EntryID": "Part 4-1",
"EntryName": "Req SI-2",
"M... | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"Aleph One"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-1029",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "08",
"PublicationMonth": "11",
"PublicationYear": "1996",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Smashing The Stack For Fun And Profit",
... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": "At the point when the product writes data to an invalid location, it is likely that a separate weakness already occurred earlier. For example, the product might alter an index, perform incorrect pointer arithmetic, initialize or release memory incorrectly, etc., thus referencing a memory locat... | [
{
"Description": "Often used to describe the consequences of writing to memory outside the bounds of a buffer, or to memory that is otherwise invalid.",
"Term": "Memory Corruption"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"119",
"787"
]
] | [] |
824 | Access of Uninitialized Pointer | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product accesses or uses a pointer that has not been initialized. |
If the pointer contains an uninitialized value, then the value might not point to a valid memory location. This could cause the product to read from or write to unexpected memory locations, leading to a denial of service. If the uninitialized pointer is used as a function call, then arbitrary functions could be invoked. If an attacker can influence the portion of uninitialized memory that is contained in the pointer, this weakness could be leveraged to execute code or perform other attacks.
Depending on memory layout, associated memory management behaviors, and product operation, the attacker might be able to influence the contents of the uninitialized pointer, thus gaining more fine-grained control of the memory location to be accessed.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "119",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C++",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | null | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Memory"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If the uninitialized pointer is used in a read operation, an attacker might be able to read sensitive portions of memory.",
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
]
},
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart"
... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | null | null | [
{
"Description": "LLM product has a free of an uninitialized pointer",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-32878",
"Reference": "CVE-2024-32878"
},
{
"Description": "Chain: secure communications library does not initialize a local variable for a data structure (CWE-456), leading t... | null | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"Mark Dowd",
"John McDonald",
"Justin Schuh"
],
"Edition": "1st Edition",
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-62",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2006",
"Publisher": "Addison Wesley",
"Sectio... | [
{
"Note": "There are close relationships between incorrect pointer dereferences and other weaknesses related to buffer operations. There may not be sufficient community agreement regarding these relationships. Further study is needed to determine when these relationships are chains, composites, perspective/laye... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"119",
"824"
]
] | [] |
200 | Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information. |
There are many different kinds of mistakes that introduce information exposures. The severity of the error can range widely, depending on the context in which the product operates, the type of sensitive information that is revealed, and the benefits it may provide to an attacker. Some kinds of sensitive information include:
- private, personal information, such as personal messages, financial data, health records, geographic location, or contact details
- system status and environment, such as the operating system and installed packages
- business secrets and intellectual property
- network status and configuration
- the product's own code or internal state
- metadata, e.g. logging of connections or message headers
- indirect information, such as a discrepancy between two internal operations that can be observed by an outsider
Information might be sensitive to different parties, each of which may have their own expectations for whether the information should be protected. These parties include:
- the product's own users
- people or organizations whose information is created or used by the product, even if they are not direct product users
- the product's administrators, including the admins of the system(s) and/or networks on which the product operates
- the developer
Information exposures can occur in different ways:
- the code **explicitly inserts** sensitive information into resources or messages that are intentionally made accessible to unauthorized actors, but should not contain the information - i.e., the information should have been "scrubbed" or "sanitized"
- a different weakness or mistake **indirectly inserts** the sensitive information into resources, such as a web script error revealing the full system path of the program.
- the code manages resources that intentionally contain sensitive information, but the resources are **unintentionally made accessible** to unauthorized actors. In this case, the information exposure is resultant - i.e., a different weakness enabled the access to the information in the first place.
It is common practice to describe any loss of confidentiality as an "information exposure," but this can lead to overuse of CWE-200 in CWE mapping. From the CWE perspective, loss of confidentiality is a technical impact that can arise from dozens of different weaknesses, such as insecure file permissions or out-of-bounds read. CWE-200 and its lower-level descendants are intended to cover the mistakes that occur in behaviors that explicitly manage, store, transfer, or cleanse sensitive information. | High | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Mobile",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "\n\nAccording to SOAR, the following detection techniques may be useful:\n\n```\n\t\tCost effective for partial coverage:\n```\n\n\t\tBytecode Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis\n\t\tInter-application Flow Analysis",
"DetectionMethodID": null,
"E... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nCompartmentalize the system to have \"safe\" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.\n\n\nEnsure that appropriate compartment... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code checks validity of the supplied username and password and notifies the user of a successful or failed login.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
... | [
{
"Description": "Rust library leaks Oauth client details in application debug logs",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-31162",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-31162"
},
{
"Description": "Digital Rights Management (DRM) capability for mobile platform leaks pointer information, simplifyin... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Information Leak (information disclosure)",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "A6",
"EntryName": "Information Leakage and Improper Error Handling",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2007"
... | [
"116",
"13",
"169",
"22",
"224",
"285",
"287",
"290",
"291",
"292",
"293",
"294",
"295",
"296",
"297",
"298",
"299",
"300",
"301",
"302",
"303",
"304",
"305",
"306",
"307",
"308",
"309",
"310",
"312",
"313",
"317",
"318",
"319",
"320",
"321",
"32... | [
{
"Authors": [
"Chris Wysopal"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-172",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "13",
"PublicationMonth": "12",
"PublicationYear": "2010",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Mobile App Top 10 List",
"URL": "... | [
{
"Note": "As a result of mapping analysis in the 2020 Top 25 and more recent versions, this weakness is under review, since it is frequently misused in mapping to cover many problems that lead to loss of confidentiality. See Mapping Notes, Extended Description, and Alternate Terms.",
"Type": "Maintenance"
... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | CWE-200 is commonly misused to represent the loss of confidentiality in a vulnerability, but confidentiality loss is a technical impact - not a root cause error. As of CWE 4.9, over 400 CWE entries can lead to a loss of confidentiality. Other options are often available. [REF-1287]. | If an error or mistake causes information to be disclosed, then use the CWE ID for that error. Consider starting with improper authorization (CWE-285), insecure permissions (CWE-732), improper authentication (CWE-287), etc. Also consider children such as Insertion of Sensitive Information Into Sent Data (CWE-201), Observable Discrepancy (CWE-203), Insertion of Sensitive Information into Externally-Accessible File or Directory (CWE-538), or others. | [
"Frequent Misuse"
] | null | [
{
"Description": "Developers may insert sensitive information that they do not believe, or they might forget to remove the sensitive information after it has been processed",
"Ordinality": "Primary"
},
{
"Description": "Separate mistakes or weaknesses could inadvertently make the sensitive informati... | [
{
"Description": "This term is frequently used in vulnerability advisories to describe a consequence or technical impact, for any vulnerability that has a loss of confidentiality. Often, CWE-200 can be misused to represent the loss of confidentiality, even when the mistake - i.e., the weakness - is not directly... | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"200"
]
] | [
"203",
"209",
"532"
] |
203 | Observable Discrepancy | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product behaves differently or sends different responses under different circumstances in a way that is observable to an unauthorized actor, which exposes security-relevant information about the state of the product, such as whether a particular operation was successful or not. | Discrepancies can take many forms, and variations may be detectable in timing, control flow, communications such as replies or requests, or general behavior. These discrepancies can reveal information about the product's operation or internal state to an unauthorized actor. In some cases, discrepancies can be used by attackers to form a side channel. | null | [
{
"CweID": "200",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Not Technology-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data",
"Bypass Protection Mechanism"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker can gain access to sensitive information about the system, including authentication information that may allow an attacker to gain access to the system.",
"Scope": [
... | null | [
{
"Description": "\n\nCompartmentalize the system to have \"safe\" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.\n\n\nEnsure that appropriate compartment... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code checks validity of the supplied username and password and notifies the user of a successful or failed login.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
... | [
{
"Description": "Observable discrepancy in the RAPL interface for some Intel processors allows information disclosure.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2020-8695",
"Reference": "CVE-2020-8695"
},
{
"Description": "Crypto hardware wallet's power consumption relates to total number... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Discrepancy Information Leaks",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "A6",
"EntryName": "Information Leakage and Improper Error Handling",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2007"
},
{
... | [
"189"
] | null | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": "Observable Discrepancies are at the root of side channel attacks.",
"Term": "Side Channel Attack"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"200",
"203"
]
] | [] |
209 | Generation of Error Message Containing Sensitive Information | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product generates an error message that includes sensitive information about its environment, users, or associated data. |
The sensitive information may be valuable information on its own (such as a password), or it may be useful for launching other, more serious attacks. The error message may be created in different ways:
- self-generated: the source code explicitly constructs the error message and delivers it
- externally-generated: the external environment, such as a language interpreter, handles the error and constructs its own message, whose contents are not under direct control by the programmer
An attacker may use the contents of error messages to help launch another, more focused attack. For example, an attempt to exploit a path traversal weakness (CWE-22) might yield the full pathname of the installed application. In turn, this could be used to select the proper number of ".." sequences to navigate to the targeted file. An attack using SQL injection (CWE-89) might not initially succeed, but an error message could reveal the malformed query, which would expose query logic and possibly even passwords or other sensitive information used within the query. | High | [
{
"CweID": "200",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "PHP",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "Java",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "System Configuration"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Ope... | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Often this will either reveal sensitive information which may be used for a later attack or private information stored in the server.",
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "This weakness generally requires domain-specific interpretation using manual analysis. However, the number of potential error conditions may be too large to cover completely within limited time constraints.",
"DetectionMethodID": null,
"Effectiveness": "High",
"EffectivenessNotes":... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nEnsure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended). The messages should not... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In the following example, sensitive information might be printed depending on the exception that occurs.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"Bod... | [
{
"Description": "POP3 server reveals a password in an error message after multiple APOP commands are sent. Might be resultant from another weakness.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2008-2049",
"Reference": "CVE-2008-2049"
},
{
"Description": "Program reveals password in error me... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Accidental leaking of sensitive information through error messages",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CLASP"
},
{
"EntryID": "A6",
"EntryName": "Information Leakage and Improper Error Handling",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName... | [
"215",
"463",
"54",
"7"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Web Application Security Consortium"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-174",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Information Leaka... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Resultant"
}
] | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"200",
"209"
]
] | [] |
532 | Insertion of Sensitive Information into Log File | Base | Simple | Incomplete | /data/images/CWE-532-Diagram.png | The product writes sensitive information to a log file. | null | Medium | [
{
"CweID": "200",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | null | [
{
"Note": "COMMISSION: This weakness refers to an incorrect design related to an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Operation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Logging sensitive user data, full path names, or system information often provides attackers with an additional, less-protected path to acquiring the information.",
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Consider seriously the sensitivity of the information written into log files. Do not write secrets into the log files.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design",
"Implementation"
],
"Strat... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In the following code snippet, a user's full name and credit card number are written to a log file.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText... | [
{
"Description": "verbose logging stores admin credentials in a world-readable log file",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2017-9615",
"Reference": "CVE-2017-9615"
},
{
"Description": "SSH password for private key stored in build log",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=C... | [
{
"EntryID": "FIO13-J",
"EntryName": "Do not log sensitive information outside a trust boundary",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "The CERT Oracle Secure Coding Standard for Java (2011)"
},
{
"EntryID": "SFP23",
"EntryName": "Exposed Data",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName":... | [
"215"
] | null | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"200",
"532"
]
] | [] |
269 | Improper Privilege Management | Class | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-269-Diagram.png | The product does not properly assign, modify, track, or check privileges for an actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor. | null | Medium | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Operation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Access Control"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": "MIT-1",
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design",
"Operation"
],
"Stra... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code temporarily raises the program's privileges to allow creation of a new user folder.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": nul... | [
{
"Description": "Terminal privileges are not reset when a user logs out.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2001-1555",
"Reference": "CVE-2001-1555"
},
{
"Description": "Does not properly pass security context to child processes in certain cases, allows privilege escalation.",
... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Privilege Management Error",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "Part 2-4",
"EntryName": "Req SP.03.08 BR",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "ISA/IEC 62443"
},
{
"EntryID": "Part 3-2",
"EntryName": "Req CR ... | [
"122",
"233",
"58"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc",
"John Viega"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-44",
"Publication": "McGraw-Hill",
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2010",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "\"Si... | [
{
"Note": "The relationships between privileges, permissions, and actors (e.g. users and groups) need further refinement within the Research view. One complication is that these concepts apply to two different pillars, related to control of resources (CWE-664) and protection mechanism failures (CWE-693).",
... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | CWE-269 is commonly misused. It can be conflated with "privilege escalation," which is a technical impact that is listed in many low-information vulnerability reports [REF-1287]. It is not useful for trend analysis. | If an error or mistake allows privilege escalation, then use the CWE ID for that mistake. Avoid using CWE-269 when only phrases such as "privilege escalation" or "gain privileges" are available, as these indicate technical impact of the vulnerability - not the root cause weakness. If the root cause seems to be directly related to privileges, then examine the children of CWE-269 for additional hints, such as Execution with Unnecessary Privileges (CWE-250) or Incorrect Privilege Assignment (CWE-266). | [
"Frequent Misuse"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
}
] | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"269"
]
] | [] |
287 | Improper Authentication | Class | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-287-Diagram.png | When an actor claims to have a given identity, the product does not prove or insufficiently proves that the claim is correct. | null | High | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "ICS/OT",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data",
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity",
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "This weakness can lead to the exposure of resources or functionality to unintended actors, possibly providing attackers with sensitiv... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nAutomated static analysis is useful for detecting certain types of authentication. A tool may be able to analyze related configuration files, such as .htaccess in Apache web servers, or detect the usage of commonly-used authentication libraries.\n\n\nGenerally, automated static analysis to... | [
{
"Description": "Use an authentication framework or library such as the OWASP ESAPI Authentication feature.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy": "Libraries or Frameworks"
}
] | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code intends to ensure that the user is already logged in. If not, the code performs authentication with the user-provided username and password. If successful, it sets the loggedin and user cookies... | [
{
"Description": "File-sharing PHP product does not check if user is logged in during requests for PHP library files under an includes/ directory, allowing configuration changes, code execution, and other impacts.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-11680",
"Reference": "CVE-2024-11680"... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Authentication Error",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "A7",
"EntryName": "Broken Authentication and Session Management",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2007"
},
{
"EntryID": ... | [
"114",
"115",
"151",
"194",
"22",
"57",
"593",
"633",
"650",
"94"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Kim Zetter"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-236",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "09",
"PublicationMonth": "01",
"PublicationYear": "2009",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Weak Password Brings 'Happiness' to Twit... | [
{
"Note": "This can be resultant from SQL injection vulnerabilities and other issues.",
"Type": "Relationship"
},
{
"Note": "The Taxonomy_Mappings to ISA/IEC 62443 were added in CWE 4.10, but they are still under review and might change in future CWE versions. These draft mappings were performed by ... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | This CWE entry might be misused when lower-level CWE entries are likely to be applicable. It is a level-1 Class (i.e., a child of a Pillar). | Consider children or descendants, beginning with CWE-1390: Weak Authentication or CWE-306: Missing Authentication for Critical Function. | [
"Frequent Misuse"
] | [
{
"Comment": "Weak Authentication",
"CweID": "1390"
},
{
"Comment": "Missing Authentication for Critical Function",
"CweID": "306"
}
] | null | [
{
"Description": "An alternate term is \"authentification\", which appears to be most commonly used by people from non-English-speaking countries.",
"Term": "authentification"
},
{
"Description": "\"AuthN\" is typically used as an abbreviation of \"authentication\" within the web application securit... | null | [
"Authentication"
] | null | 1 | [
[
"287"
]
] | [
"290",
"294",
"295",
"306",
"307",
"521",
"522",
"640",
"798"
] |
290 | Authentication Bypass by Spoofing | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | This attack-focused weakness is caused by incorrectly implemented authentication schemes that are subject to spoofing attacks. | null | null | [
{
"CweID": "287",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | null | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Bypass Protection Mechanism",
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "This weakness can allow an attacker to access resources which are not otherwise accessible without proper authentication.",
"Scope": [
"Access Control"
]
}
] | null | null | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code authenticates users.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "```\n\tString sourceIP = re... | [
{
"Description": "S-bus functionality in a home automation product performs access control using an IP allowlist, which can be bypassed by a forged IP address.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-30319",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-30319"
},
{
"Description": "VOIP product allows auth... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Authentication bypass by spoofing",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
}
] | [
"21",
"22",
"459",
"461",
"473",
"476",
"59",
"60",
"667",
"94"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Mark Dowd",
"John McDonald",
"Justin Schuh"
],
"Edition": "1st Edition",
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-62",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2006",
"Publisher": "Addison Wesley",
"Sectio... | [
{
"Note": "This can be resultant from insufficient verification.",
"Type": "Relationship"
}
] | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"287",
"290"
]
] | [] |
294 | Authentication Bypass by Capture-replay | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | A capture-replay flaw exists when the design of the product makes it possible for a malicious user to sniff network traffic and bypass authentication by replaying it to the server in question to the same effect as the original message (or with minor changes). | Capture-replay attacks are common and can be difficult to defeat without cryptography. They are a subset of network injection attacks that rely on observing previously-sent valid commands, then changing them slightly if necessary and resending the same commands to the server. | High | [
{
"CweID": "287",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "COMMISSION: This weakness refers to an incorrect design related to an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Messages sent with a capture-relay attack allow access to resources which are not otherwise accessible without proper authentication.",
"Scope": [
"Access Control"
]
}
] | null | [
{
"Description": "Utilize some sequence or time stamping functionality along with a checksum which takes this into account in order to ensure that messages can be parsed only once.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Desig... | null | [
{
"Description": "product authentication succeeds if user-provided MD5 hash matches the hash in its database; this can be subjected to replay attacks.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2005-3435",
"Reference": "CVE-2005-3435"
},
{
"Description": "Chain: cleartext transmission of th... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Authentication bypass by replay",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Capture-replay",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CLASP"
}
] | [
"102",
"509",
"555",
"561",
"60",
"644",
"645",
"652",
"701",
"94"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Secure Software, Inc."
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-18",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2005",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "The CLASP Application Security... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"287",
"294"
]
] | [] |
295 | Improper Certificate Validation | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate. | When a certificate is invalid or malicious, it might allow an attacker to spoof a trusted entity by interfering in the communication path between the host and client. The product might connect to a malicious host while believing it is a trusted host, or the product might be deceived into accepting spoofed data that appears to originate from a trusted host. | null | [
{
"CweID": "287",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Mobile",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": "When the product uses certificate pinning, the developer might not properly validate ... | [
{
"Impact": [
"Bypass Protection Mechanism",
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Integrity",
"Authentication"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "\n\nAccording to SOAR, the following detection techniques may be useful:\n\n```\n\t\tCost effective for partial coverage:\n```\n\n\t\tBytecode Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis\n\t\tBinary Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weaknes... | [
{
"Description": "Certificates should be carefully managed and checked to assure that data are encrypted with the intended owner's public key.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design",
"Implementation"
],
... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code checks the certificate of a connected peer.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "```\n\tif ((c... | [
{
"Description": "A Go framework for robotics, drones, and IoT devices skips verification of root CA certificates by default.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2019-12496",
"Reference": "CVE-2019-12496"
},
{
"Description": "chain: incorrect \"goto\" in Apple SSL product bypasses ce... | [
{
"EntryID": "A10",
"EntryName": "Insecure Configuration Management",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2004"
}
] | [
"459",
"475"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Sascha Fahl, Marian Harbach, Thomas Muders, Matthew Smith",
"Lars Baumgärtner, Bernd Freisleben"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-243",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "16",
"PublicationMonth": "10",
"PublicationYear": "2012",
"Pu... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | [
"A certificate is a token that associates an identity (principal) to a cryptographic key. Certificates can be used to check if a public key belongs to the assumed owner."
] | 1 | [
[
"287",
"295"
]
] | [] |
306 | Missing Authentication for Critical Function | Base | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-306-Diagram.png | The product does not perform any authentication for functionality that requires a provable user identity or consumes a significant amount of resources. | null | High | [
{
"CweID": "287",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Cloud Computing",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
},
{
"Class": "ICS/OT",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Often",
"T... | [
{
"Note": "OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the architecture and design phase.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "Developers sometimes perform authentication at the primary channel, but open up a secondary channel that is assumed to be private. Fo... | [
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity",
"Varies by Context"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Exposing critical functionality essentially provides an attacker with the privilege level of that functionality. The consequences will depend on the associated functionality, but they ... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThis weakness can be detected using tools and techniques that require manual (human) analysis, such as penetration testing, threat modeling, and interactive tools that allow the tester to record and modify an active session.\n\n\nSpecifically, manual static analysis is useful for evaluatin... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nDivide the software into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Identify which of these areas require a proven user identity, and use a centralized authentication capability.\n\n\nIdentify all potential communication channels, or other means of interaction with the softwa... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In the following Java example the method createBankAccount is used to create a BankAccount object for a bank management application.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
... | [
{
"Description": "File-sharing PHP product does not check if user is logged in during requests for PHP library files under an includes/ directory, allowing configuration changes, code execution, and other impacts.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-11680",
"Reference": "CVE-2024-11680"... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "No Authentication for Critical Function",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "SFP31",
"EntryName": "Missing authentication",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "Software Fault Patterns"
},
{
"EntryID": "Part 4-2"... | [
"12",
"166",
"216",
"36",
"62"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Mark Dowd",
"John McDonald",
"Justin Schuh"
],
"Edition": "1st Edition",
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-62",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2006",
"Publisher": "Addison Wesley",
"Sectio... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"287",
"306"
]
] | [] |
307 | Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts | Base | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-307-Diagram.png | The product does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame. | null | null | [
{
"CweID": "287",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "COMMISSION: This weakness refers to an incorrect design related to an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Bypass Protection Mechanism"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker could perform an arbitrary number of authentication attempts using different passwords, and eventually gain access to the targeted account using a brute force attack.",
"Scope": [
"Access Control"... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nAccording to SOAR, the following detection techniques may be useful:\n\n```\n\t\tHighly cost effective:\n```\n\n\t\tWeb Application Scanner\n\t\tWeb Services Scanner\n\t\tDatabase Scanners\n\t```\n\t\tCost effective for partial coverage:\n```\n\n\t\tHost-based Vulnerability Scanners - Exam... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nCommon protection mechanisms include:\n\n\n - Disconnecting the user after a small number of failed attempts\n\n - Implementing a timeout\n\n - Locking out a targeted account\n\n - Requiring a computational task on the user's part.\n\n",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNot... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In January 2009, an attacker was able to gain administrator access to a Twitter server because the server did not restrict the number of login attempts [REF-236]. The attacker targeted a member of Twitter's suppo... | [
{
"Description": "the REST API for a network OS has a high limit for number of connections, allowing brute force password guessing",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2019-0039",
"Reference": "CVE-2019-0039"
},
{
"Description": "Product does not disconnect or timeout after multiple f... | [
{
"EntryID": "AUTHENT.MULTFAIL",
"EntryName": "Multiple Failed Authentication Attempts not Prevented",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "SFP34",
"EntryName": "Unrestricted authentication",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "Software Fault Patterns"
... | [
"16",
"49",
"560",
"565",
"600",
"652",
"653"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"OWASP"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-45",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "OWASP Enterprise Security API (ESAPI) Project",
... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"287",
"307"
]
] | [] |
521 | Weak Password Requirements | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not require that users should have strong passwords, which makes it easier for attackers to compromise user accounts. | Authentication mechanisms often rely on a memorized secret (also known as a password) to provide an assertion of identity for a user of a system. It is therefore important that this password be of sufficient complexity and impractical for an adversary to guess. The specific requirements around how complex a password needs to be depends on the type of system being protected. Selecting the correct password requirements and enforcing them through implementation are critical to the overall success of the authentication mechanism. | null | [
{
"CweID": "287",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Not Technology-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "COMMISSION: This weakness refers to an incorrect design related to an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "Not enforcing the password policy stated in a products design can allow users to create passwords that do not provide the necessary level... | [
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker could easily guess user passwords and gain access user accounts.",
"Scope": [
"Access Control"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nA product's design should require adherance to an appropriate password policy. Specific password requirements depend strongly on contextual factors, but it is recommended to contain the following attributes:\n\n\n - Enforcement of a minimum and maximum length\n\n - Restrictions against p... | null | [
{
"Description": "key server application does not require strong passwords",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2020-4574",
"Reference": "CVE-2020-4574"
}
] | [
{
"EntryID": "A3",
"EntryName": "Broken Authentication and Session Management",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2004"
}
] | [
"112",
"16",
"49",
"509",
"55",
"555",
"561",
"565",
"70"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc",
"John Viega"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-44",
"Publication": "McGraw-Hill",
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2010",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "\"Si... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"287",
"521"
]
] | [] |
522 | Insufficiently Protected Credentials | Class | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product transmits or stores authentication credentials, but it uses an insecure method that is susceptible to unauthorized interception and/or retrieval. | null | null | [
{
"CweID": "287",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "ICS/OT",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "COMMISSION: This weakness refers to an incorrect design related to an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker could gain access to user accounts and access sensitive data used by the user accounts.",
"Scope": [
"Access Control"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Use an appropriate security mechanism to protect the credentials.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Description": "Make appropriate use of cryptography ... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code changes a user's password.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "```\n\t$user = $_GET['user'];\... | [
{
"Description": "A messaging platform serializes all elements of User/Group objects, making private information available to adversaries",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-30018",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-30018"
},
{
"Description": "Initialization file contains credentials that ... | [
{
"EntryID": "A7",
"EntryName": "Broken Authentication and Session Management",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2007"
},
{
"EntryID": "A3",
"EntryName": "Broken Authentication and Session Management",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyN... | [
"102",
"474",
"50",
"509",
"551",
"555",
"560",
"561",
"600",
"644",
"645",
"652",
"653"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc",
"John Viega"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-44",
"Publication": "McGraw-Hill",
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2010",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "\"Si... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"287",
"522"
]
] | [] |
640 | Weak Password Recovery Mechanism for Forgotten Password | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product contains a mechanism for users to recover or change their passwords without knowing the original password, but the mechanism is weak. |
It is common for an application to have a mechanism that provides a means for a user to gain access to their account in the event they forget their password. Very often the password recovery mechanism is weak, which has the effect of making it more likely that it would be possible for a person other than the legitimate system user to gain access to that user's account. Weak password recovery schemes completely undermine a strong password authentication scheme.
This weakness may be that the security question is too easy to guess or find an answer to (e.g. because the question is too common, or the answers can be found using social media). Or there might be an implementation weakness in the password recovery mechanism code that may for instance trick the system into e-mailing the new password to an e-mail account other than that of the user. There might be no throttling done on the rate of password resets so that a legitimate user can be denied service by an attacker if an attacker tries to recover their password in a rapid succession. The system may send the original password to the user rather than generating a new temporary password. In summary, password recovery functionality, if not carefully designed and implemented can often become the system's weakest link that can be misused in a way that would allow an attacker to gain unauthorized access to the system.
| High | [
{
"CweID": "287",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "COMMISSION: This weakness refers to an incorrect design related to an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker could gain unauthorized access to the system by retrieving legitimate user's authentication credentials.",
"Scope": [
"Access Control"
]
},
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Resource Co... | null | [
{
"Description": "Make sure that all input supplied by the user to the password recovery mechanism is thoroughly filtered and validated.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "A famous example of this type of weakness being exploited is the eBay attack. eBay always displays the user id of the highest bidder. In the final minutes of the auction, one of the bidders could try to log in as... | null | [
{
"EntryID": "49",
"EntryName": "Insufficient Password Recovery",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "WASC"
}
] | [
"50"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc",
"John Viega"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-44",
"Publication": "McGraw-Hill",
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2010",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "\"Si... | [
{
"Note": "This entry might be reclassified as a category or \"loose composite,\" since it lists multiple specific errors that can make the mechanism weak. However, under view 1000, it could be a weakness under protection mechanism failure, although it is different from most PMF issues since it is related to a ... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This entry appears to be frequently misused for any weakness related to password changes, even though the name focuses on "Password Recovery" for a "forgotten" password. | CWE-640 should only be used when there is a "password recovery" mechanism for forgotten passwords. Consider password-related entries under CWE-1390: Weak Authentication. | [
"Frequent Misuse"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"287",
"640"
]
] | [] |
798 | Use of Hard-coded Credentials | Base | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-798-Diagram.png | The product contains hard-coded credentials, such as a password or cryptographic key. |
There are two main variations:
- Inbound: the product contains an authentication mechanism that checks the input credentials against a hard-coded set of credentials. In this variant, a default administration account is created, and a simple password is hard-coded into the product and associated with that account. This hard-coded password is the same for each installation of the product, and it usually cannot be changed or disabled by system administrators without manually modifying the program, or otherwise patching the product. It can also be difficult for the administrator to detect.
- Outbound: the product connects to another system or component, and it contains hard-coded credentials for connecting to that component. This variant applies to front-end systems that authenticate with a back-end service. The back-end service may require a fixed password that can be easily discovered. The programmer may simply hard-code those back-end credentials into the front-end product.
| High | [
{
"CweID": "287",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Mobile",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
},
{
"Class": "ICS/OT",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Te... | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Bypass Protection Mechanism"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "\n\nIf hard-coded passwords are used, it is almost certain that malicious users will gain access to the account in question.\n\n\nAny user of the product that hard-codes passwords may be able to extract the password. C... | [
{
"Description": "Credential storage in configuration files is findable using black box methods, but the use of hard-coded credentials for an incoming authentication routine typically involves an account that is not visible outside of the code.",
"DetectionMethodID": null,
"Effectiveness": "Moderate",
... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nFor outbound authentication: store passwords, keys, and other credentials outside of the code in a strongly-protected, encrypted configuration file or database that is protected from access by all outsiders, including other local users on the same system. Properly protect the key (CWE-320)... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code uses a hard-coded password to connect to a database:",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCod... | [
{
"Description": "Condition Monitor firmware has a maintenance interface with hard-coded credentials",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-29953",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-29953"
},
{
"Description": "Engineering Workstation uses hard-coded cryptographic keys that could allow for una... | [
{
"EntryID": "MSC03-J",
"EntryName": "Never hard code sensitive information",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "The CERT Oracle Secure Coding Standard for Java (2011)"
},
{
"EntryID": "ASCSM-CWE-798",
"EntryName": null,
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "OMG ASCSM"
},
{
... | [
"191",
"70"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc"
],
"Edition": "2nd Edition",
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-7",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "04",
"PublicationMonth": "12",
"PublicationYear": "2002",
"Publisher": "Microsoft Press",
"Section": "Chapter 8, \... | [
{
"Note": "The Taxonomy_Mappings to ISA/IEC 62443 were added in CWE 4.10, but they are still under review and might change in future CWE versions. These draft mappings were performed by members of the \"Mapping CWE to 62443\" subgroup of the CWE-CAPEC ICS/OT Special Interest Group (SIG), and their work is incom... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
}
] | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"287",
"798"
]
] | [] |
311 | Missing Encryption of Sensitive Data | Class | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-311-Diagram.png | The product does not encrypt sensitive or critical information before storage or transmission. | null | High | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the architecture and design phase.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Operation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If the application does not use a secure channel, such as SSL, to exchange sensitive information, it is possible for an attacker with access to the network traffic to sniff packets from the connection and uncover the data. T... | [
{
"Description": "The characterizaton of sensitive data often requires domain-specific understanding, so manual methods are useful. However, manual efforts might not achieve desired code coverage within limited time constraints. Black box methods may produce artifacts (e.g. stored data or unencrypted network tr... | [
{
"Description": "Clearly specify which data or resources are valuable enough that they should be protected by encryption. Require that any transmission or storage of this data/resource should use well-vetted encryption algorithms.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID":... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code writes a user's login information to a cookie so the user does not have to login again later.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"Body... | [
{
"Description": "password and username stored in cleartext in a cookie",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2009-2272",
"Reference": "CVE-2009-2272"
},
{
"Description": "password stored in cleartext in a file with insecure permissions",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=C... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Failure to encrypt data",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CLASP"
},
{
"EntryID": "A8",
"EntryName": "Insecure Cryptographic Storage",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2007"
},
{
"EntryID": "A9",
"E... | [
"157",
"158",
"204",
"31",
"37",
"383",
"384",
"385",
"386",
"387",
"388",
"477",
"609",
"65"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Secure Software, Inc."
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-18",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2005",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "The CLASP Application Security... | [
{
"Note": "There is an overlapping relationship between insecure storage of sensitive information (CWE-922) and missing encryption of sensitive information (CWE-311). Encryption is often used to prevent an attacker from reading the sensitive data. However, encryption does not prevent the attacker from erasing o... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | CWE-311 is high-level with more precise children available. It is a level-1 Class (i.e., a child of a Pillar). | Consider children CWE-312: Cleartext Storage of Sensitive Information or CWE-319: Cleartext Transmission of Sensitive Information. | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"311"
]
] | [
"312",
"319"
] |
312 | Cleartext Storage of Sensitive Information | Base | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-312-Diagram.png | The product stores sensitive information in cleartext within a resource that might be accessible to another control sphere. | null | null | [
{
"CweID": "311",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Cloud Computing",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
},
{
"Class": "ICS/OT",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",... | [
{
"Note": "OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the architecture and design phase.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker with access to the system could read sensitive information stored in cleartext (i.e., unencrypted). Even if the information is encoded in a way that is not human-readable, certain techniques could determine which... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "When storing data in the cloud (e.g., S3 buckets, Azure blobs, Google Cloud Storage, etc.), use the provider's controls to encrypt the data at rest. [REF-1297] [REF-1299] [REF-1301]",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Imp... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code excerpt stores a plaintext user account ID in a browser cookie.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
... | [
{
"Description": "Remote Terminal Unit (RTU) uses a driver that relies on a password stored in plaintext.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-30275",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-30275"
},
{
"Description": "password and username stored in cleartext in a cookie",
"Link": "https://w... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Plaintext Storage of Sensitive Information",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "SFP23",
"EntryName": "Exposed Data",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "Software Fault Patterns"
},
{
"EntryID": "Part 4-2",
"... | [
"37"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc"
],
"Edition": "2nd Edition",
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-7",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "04",
"PublicationMonth": "12",
"PublicationYear": "2002",
"Publisher": "Microsoft Press",
"Section": "Chapter 9, \... | [
{
"Note": "Different people use \"cleartext\" and \"plaintext\" to mean the same thing: the lack of encryption. However, within cryptography, these have more precise meanings. Plaintext is the information just before it is fed into a cryptographic algorithm, including already-encrypted text. Cleartext is any in... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"311",
"312"
]
] | [] |
319 | Cleartext Transmission of Sensitive Information | Base | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-319-Diagram.png | The product transmits sensitive or security-critical data in cleartext in a communication channel that can be sniffed by unauthorized actors. | null | High | [
{
"CweID": "311",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Cloud Computing",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
},
{
"Class": "Mobile",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",... | [
{
"Note": "OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the architecture and design phase.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "For hardware, this may be introduced when design does not plan for an attacker having physical access while a legitimate user is remo... | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data",
"Modify Files or Directories"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Anyone can read the information by gaining access to the channel being used for communication. Many communication channels can be \"sniffed\" (monitored) by adversaries during data transm... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse monitoring tools that examine the software's process as it interacts with the operating system and the network. This technique is useful in cases when source code is unavailable, if the software was not developed by you, or if you want to verify that the build phase did not introduce a... | [
{
"Description": "Before transmitting, encrypt the data using reliable, confidentiality-protecting cryptographic protocols.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Description"... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code attempts to establish a connection to a site to communicate sensitive information.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyTe... | [
{
"Description": "Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) sends sensitive information in plaintext, including passwords and session tokens.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-29519",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-29519"
},
{
"Description": "Building Controller uses a protocol that transmi... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Plaintext Transmission of Sensitive Information",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "SEC06-J",
"EntryName": "Do not rely on the default automatic signature verification provided by URLClassLoader and java.util.jar",
"Mapping... | [
"102",
"117",
"383",
"477",
"65"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"OWASP"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-271",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2007",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Top 10 2007-Insecure Communications",
"UR... | [
{
"Note": "The Taxonomy_Mappings to ISA/IEC 62443 were added in CWE 4.10, but they are still under review and might change in future CWE versions. These draft mappings were performed by members of the \"Mapping CWE to 62443\" subgroup of the CWE-CAPEC ICS/OT Special Interest Group (SIG), and their work is incom... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"311",
"319"
]
] | [] |
326 | Inadequate Encryption Strength | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product stores or transmits sensitive data using an encryption scheme that is theoretically sound, but is not strong enough for the level of protection required. | A weak encryption scheme can be subjected to brute force attacks that have a reasonable chance of succeeding using current attack methods and resources. | null | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "COMMISSION: This weakness refers to an incorrect design related to an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Bypass Protection Mechanism",
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker may be able to decrypt the data using brute force attacks.",
"Scope": [
"Access Control",
"Confidentiality"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Use an encryption scheme that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy": null
}
] | null | [
{
"Description": "Weak encryption",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2001-1546",
"Reference": "CVE-2001-1546"
},
{
"Description": "Weak encryption (chosen plaintext attack)",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2004-2172",
"Reference": "CVE-2004-2172"
},
{
... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Weak Encryption",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "A8",
"EntryName": "Insecure Cryptographic Storage",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2007"
},
{
"EntryID": "A9",
"EntryNam... | [
"112",
"192",
"20"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc"
],
"Edition": "2nd Edition",
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-7",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "04",
"PublicationMonth": "12",
"PublicationYear": "2002",
"Publisher": "Microsoft Press",
"Section": "Chapter 8, \... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"326"
]
] | [] |
327 | Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol. |
Cryptographic algorithms are the methods by which data is scrambled to prevent observation or influence by unauthorized actors. Insecure cryptography can be exploited to expose sensitive information, modify data in unexpected ways, spoof identities of other users or devices, or other impacts.
It is very difficult to produce a secure algorithm, and even high-profile algorithms by accomplished cryptographic experts have been broken. Well-known techniques exist to break or weaken various kinds of cryptography. Accordingly, there are a small number of well-understood and heavily studied algorithms that should be used by most products. Using a non-standard or known-insecure algorithm is dangerous because a determined adversary may be able to break the algorithm and compromise whatever data has been protected.
Since the state of cryptography advances so rapidly, it is common for an algorithm to be considered "unsafe" even if it was once thought to be strong. This can happen when new attacks are discovered, or if computing power increases so much that the cryptographic algorithm no longer provides the amount of protection that was originally thought.
For a number of reasons, this weakness is even more challenging to manage with hardware deployment of cryptographic algorithms as opposed to software implementation. First, if a flaw is discovered with hardware-implemented cryptography, the flaw cannot be fixed in most cases without a recall of the product, because hardware is not easily replaceable like software. Second, because the hardware product is expected to work for years, the adversary's computing power will only increase over time.
| High | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "Verilog",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "VHDL",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type":... | [
{
"Note": "COMMISSION: This weakness refers to an incorrect design related to an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "With hardware, the Architecture or Design Phase might start with compliant cryptography, but it is replaced with a non-compliant crypto d... | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "The confidentiality of sensitive data may be compromised by the use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm.",
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
]
},
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Application Data"
],... | [
{
"Description": "Automated methods may be useful for recognizing commonly-used libraries or features that have become obsolete.",
"DetectionMethodID": null,
"Effectiveness": "Moderate",
"EffectivenessNotes": "False negatives may occur if the tool is not aware of the cryptographic libraries in use, ... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nWhen there is a need to store or transmit sensitive data, use strong, up-to-date cryptographic algorithms to encrypt that data. Select a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and use well-tested implementations. As with all cryptographic m... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "These code examples use the Data Encryption Standard (DES).",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "```\n\t... | [
{
"Description": "SCADA-based protocol supports a legacy encryption mode that uses Tiny Encryption Algorithm (TEA) in ECB mode, which leaks patterns in messages and cannot protect integrity",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-30273",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-30273"
},
{
"Descripti... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Using a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CLASP"
},
{
"EntryID": "A8",
"EntryName": "Insecure Storage",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2004"
},
{
"EntryID": "M... | [
"20",
"459",
"473",
"475",
"608",
"614",
"97"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Bruce Schneier"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-280",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "1996",
"Publisher": "John Wiley & Sons",
"Section": null,
"Title": "Applied Cryptography"... | [
{
"Note": "Since CWE 4.4, various cryptography-related entries, including CWE-327 and CWE-1240, have been slated for extensive research, analysis, and community consultation to define consistent terminology, improve relationships, and reduce overlap or duplication. As of CWE 4.6, this work is still ongoing.",
... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"327"
]
] | [
"916"
] |
916 | Use of Password Hash With Insufficient Computational Effort | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product generates a hash for a password, but it uses a scheme that does not provide a sufficient level of computational effort that would make password cracking attacks infeasible or expensive. |
Many password storage mechanisms compute a hash and store the hash, instead of storing the original password in plaintext. In this design, authentication involves accepting an incoming password, computing its hash, and comparing it to the stored hash.
Many hash algorithms are designed to execute quickly with minimal overhead, even cryptographic hashes. However, this efficiency is a problem for password storage, because it can reduce an attacker's workload for brute-force password cracking. If an attacker can obtain the hashes through some other method (such as SQL injection on a database that stores hashes), then the attacker can store the hashes offline and use various techniques to crack the passwords by computing hashes efficiently. Without a built-in workload, modern attacks can compute large numbers of hashes, or even exhaust the entire space of all possible passwords, within a very short amount of time, using massively-parallel computing (such as cloud computing) and GPU, ASIC, or FPGA hardware. In such a scenario, an efficient hash algorithm helps the attacker.
There are several properties of a hash scheme that are relevant to its strength against an offline, massively-parallel attack:
- The amount of CPU time required to compute the hash ("stretching")
- The amount of memory required to compute the hash ("memory-hard" operations)
- Including a random value, along with the password, as input to the hash computation ("salting")
- Given a hash, there is no known way of determining an input (e.g., a password) that produces this hash value, other than by guessing possible inputs ("one-way" hashing)
- Relative to the number of all possible hashes that can be generated by the scheme, there is a low likelihood of producing the same hash for multiple different inputs ("collision resistance")
Note that the security requirements for the product may vary depending on the environment and the value of the passwords. Different schemes might not provide all of these properties, yet may still provide sufficient security for the environment. Conversely, a solution might be very strong in preserving one property, which still being very weak for an attack against another property, or it might not be able to significantly reduce the efficiency of a massively-parallel attack. | null | [
{
"CweID": "327",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Bypass Protection Mechanism",
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If an attacker can gain access to the hashes, then the lack of sufficient computational effort will make it easier to conduct brute force attacks using techniques such as rai... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nAccording to SOAR, the following detection techniques may be useful:\n\n```\n\t\tCost effective for partial coverage:\n```\n\n\t\tBytecode Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis\n\t\tBinary Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weaknes... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse an adaptive hash function that can be configured to change the amount of computational effort needed to compute the hash, such as the number of iterations (\"stretching\") or the amount of memory required. Some hash functions perform salting automatically. These functions can significa... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In this example, a new user provides a new username and password to create an account. The program hashes the new user's password then stores it in a database.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
... | [
{
"Description": "Router does not use a salt with a hash, making it easier to crack passwords.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2008-1526",
"Reference": "CVE-2008-1526"
},
{
"Description": "Router does not use a salt with a hash, making it easier to crack passwords.",
"Link": ... | null | [
"55"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Johnny Shelley"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-291",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "bcrypt",
"URL": "http://bcrypt.sou... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
}
] | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"327",
"916"
]
] | [] |
330 | Use of Insufficiently Random Values | Class | Simple | Stable | null | The product uses insufficiently random numbers or values in a security context that depends on unpredictable numbers. | When product generates predictable values in a context requiring unpredictability, it may be possible for an attacker to guess the next value that will be generated, and use this guess to impersonate another user or access sensitive information. | High | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Not Technology-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Other"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "When a protection mechanism relies on random values to restrict access to a sensitive resource, such as a session ID or a seed for generating a cryptographic key, then the resource being protected could be accessed by guessing the ID or key... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse monitoring tools that examine the software's process as it interacts with the operating system and the network. This technique is useful in cases when source code is unavailable, if the software was not developed by you, or if you want to verify that the build phase did not introduce a... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and select well-tested implementations with adequate length seeds.\n\n\nIn general, if a pseudo-random number generator is not advertised as being cryptographically secure, then it is probably a ... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code attempts to generate a unique random identifier for a user's session.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"Ex... | [
{
"Description": "PHP framework uses mt_rand() function (Marsenne Twister) when generating tokens",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-3692",
"Reference": "CVE-2021-3692"
},
{
"Description": "Cloud application on Kubernetes generates passwords using a weak random number generator... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Randomness and Predictability",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Insecure Randomness",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": "A2",
"EntryName": "Brok... | [
"112",
"485",
"59"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Information Technology Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-267",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "25",
"PublicationMonth": "05",
"PublicationYear": "2001",
"Publisher": null,
... | [
{
"Note": "This can be primary to many other weaknesses such as cryptographic errors, authentication errors, symlink following, information leaks, and others.",
"Type": "Relationship"
},
{
"Note": "As of CWE 4.3, CWE-330 and its descendants are being investigated by the CWE crypto team to identify g... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | This CWE entry is a level-1 Class (i.e., a child of a Pillar). It might have lower-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
}
] | null | null | [
"Cryptography",
"Authentication",
"Session Management"
] | [
"Computers are deterministic machines, and as such are unable to produce true randomness. Pseudo-Random Number Generators (PRNGs) approximate randomness algorithmically, starting with a seed from which subsequent values are calculated. There are two types of PRNGs: statistical and cryptographic. Statistical PRNGs p... | 1 | [
[
"330"
]
] | [
"331",
"335",
"338"
] |
331 | Insufficient Entropy | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product uses an algorithm or scheme that produces insufficient entropy, leaving patterns or clusters of values that are more likely to occur than others. | null | null | [
{
"CweID": "330",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Bypass Protection Mechanism",
"Other"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker could guess the random numbers generated and could gain unauthorized access to a system if the random numbers are used for authentication and authorization.",
"Scope": [
"Access Con... | null | [
{
"Description": "Determine the necessary entropy to adequately provide for randomness and predictability. This can be achieved by increasing the number of bits of objects such as keys and seeds.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Impleme... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code generates a unique random identifier for a user's session.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode":... | [
{
"Description": "Insufficiently random data used to generate session tokens using C rand(). Also, for certificate/key generation, uses a source that does not block when entropy is low.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2001-0950",
"Reference": "CVE-2001-0950"
},
{
"Description": "... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Insufficient Entropy",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "11",
"EntryName": "Brute Force",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "WASC"
},
{
"EntryID": "MSC32-C",
"EntryName": "Properly seed pseudorandom number... | [
"59"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"John Viega",
"Gary McGraw"
],
"Edition": "1st Edition",
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-207",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2002",
"Publisher": "Addison-Wesley",
"Section": null,
"Title":... | [
{
"Note": "As of CWE 4.5, terminology related to randomness, entropy, and predictability can vary widely. Within the developer and other communities, \"randomness\" is used heavily. However, within cryptography, \"entropy\" is distinct, typically implied as a measurement. There are no commonly-used definitions,... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"330",
"331"
]
] | [] |
335 | Incorrect Usage of Seeds in Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product uses a Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) but does not correctly manage seeds. |
PRNGs are deterministic and, while their output appears random, they cannot actually create entropy. They rely on cryptographically secure and unique seeds for entropy so proper seeding is critical to the secure operation of the PRNG.
Management of seeds could be broken down into two main areas:
- (1) protecting seeds as cryptographic material (such as a cryptographic key);
- (2) whenever possible, using a uniquely generated seed from a cryptographically secure source
PRNGs require a seed as input to generate a stream of numbers that are functionally indistinguishable from random numbers. While the output is, in many cases, sufficient for cryptographic uses, the output of any PRNG is directly determined by the seed provided as input. If the seed can be ascertained by a third party, the entire output of the PRNG can be made known to them. As such, the seed should be kept secret and should ideally not be able to be guessed. For example, the current time may be a poor seed. Knowing the approximate time the PRNG was seeded greatly reduces the possible key space.
Seeds do not necessarily need to be unique, but reusing seeds may open up attacks if the seed is discovered.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "330",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Bypass Protection Mechanism",
"Other"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If a PRNG is used incorrectly, such as using the same seed for each initialization or using a predictable seed, then an attacker may be able to easily guess the seed and thus the random numbers. This cou... | null | null | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code uses a statistical PRNG to generate account IDs.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": ... | [
{
"Description": "Cloud application on Kubernetes generates passwords using a weak random number generator based on deployment time.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2020-7010",
"Reference": "CVE-2020-7010"
},
{
"Description": "server uses erlang:now() to seed the PRNG, which resu... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "PRNG Seed Error",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
}
] | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc",
"John Viega"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-44",
"Publication": "McGraw-Hill",
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2010",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "\"Si... | [
{
"Note": "As of CWE 4.5, terminology related to randomness, entropy, and predictability can vary widely. Within the developer and other communities, \"randomness\" is used heavily. However, within cryptography, \"entropy\" is distinct, typically implied as a measurement. There are no commonly-used definitions,... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"330",
"335"
]
] | [] |
338 | Use of Cryptographically Weak Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product uses a Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) in a security context, but the PRNG's algorithm is not cryptographically strong. |
When a non-cryptographic PRNG is used in a cryptographic context, it can expose the cryptography to certain types of attacks.
Often a pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) is not designed for cryptography. Sometimes a mediocre source of randomness is sufficient or preferable for algorithms that use random numbers. Weak generators generally take less processing power and/or do not use the precious, finite, entropy sources on a system. While such PRNGs might have very useful features, these same features could be used to break the cryptography.
| Medium | [
{
"CweID": "330",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Bypass Protection Mechanism"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If a PRNG is used for authentication and authorization, such as a session ID or a seed for generating a cryptographic key, then an attacker may be able to easily guess the ID or cryptographic key and gain access to res... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Use functions or hardware which use a hardware-based random number generation for all crypto. This is the recommended solution. Use CyptGenRandom on Windows, or hw_rand() on Linux.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Impl... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "Both of these examples use a statistical PRNG seeded with the current value of the system clock to generate a random number:",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
... | [
{
"Description": "PHP framework uses mt_rand() function (Marsenne Twister) when generating tokens",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-3692",
"Reference": "CVE-2021-3692"
},
{
"Description": "Crypto product uses rand() library function to generate a recovery key, making it easier... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Non-cryptographic PRNG",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CLASP"
},
{
"EntryID": "MSC30-C",
"EntryName": "Do not use the rand() function for generating pseudorandom numbers",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Abstract",
"TaxonomyName": "CERT C Secure Co... | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"Secure Software, Inc."
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-18",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2005",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "The CLASP Application Security... | [
{
"Note": "As of CWE 4.5, terminology related to randomness, entropy, and predictability can vary widely. Within the developer and other communities, \"randomness\" is used heavily. However, within cryptography, \"entropy\" is distinct, typically implied as a measurement. There are no commonly-used definitions,... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"330",
"338"
]
] | [] |
345 | Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not sufficiently verify the origin or authenticity of data, in a way that causes it to accept invalid data. | null | null | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "ICS/OT",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Varies by Context",
"Unexpected State"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Integrity",
"Other"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | null | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In 2022, the OT:ICEFALL study examined products by 10 different Operational Technology (OT) vendors. The researchers reported 56 vulnerabilities and said that the products were \"insecure by design\" [REF-1283]. ... | [
{
"Description": "Distributed Control System (DCS) does not sign firmware images and only relies on insecure checksums for integrity checks",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-30260",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-30260"
},
{
"Description": "Distributed Control System (DCS) does not si... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Insufficient Verification of Data",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "A3",
"EntryName": "Broken Authentication and Session Management",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2004"
},
{
... | [
"111",
"141",
"142",
"148",
"218",
"384",
"385",
"386",
"387",
"388",
"665",
"701"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc",
"John Viega"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-44",
"Publication": "McGraw-Hill",
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2010",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "\"Si... | [
{
"Note": "\"origin validation\" could fall under this.",
"Type": "Relationship"
},
{
"Note": "The specific ways in which the origin is not properly identified should be laid out as separate weaknesses. In some sense, this is more like a category.",
"Type": "Maintenance"
}
] | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | This CWE entry is a level-1 Class (i.e., a child of a Pillar). It might have lower-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"345"
]
] | [
"346",
"347",
"352",
"354",
"924"
] |
346 | Origin Validation Error | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not properly verify that the source of data or communication is valid. | null | null | [
{
"CweID": "345",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity",
"Varies by Context"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker can access any functionality that is inadvertently accessible to the source.",
"Scope": [
"Access Control",
"Other"
]
}
] | null | null | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This Android application will remove a user account when it receives an intent to do so:",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
... | [
{
"Description": "DNS server can accept DNS updates from hosts that it did not query, leading to cache poisoning",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2000-1218",
"Reference": "CVE-2000-1218"
},
{
"Description": "DNS server can accept DNS updates from hosts that it did not query, leadi... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Origin Validation Error",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "Part 3-3",
"EntryName": "Req SR 2.12 RE(1)",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "ISA/IEC 62443"
},
{
"EntryID": "Part 4-1",
"EntryName": "Req SD-1... | [
"111",
"141",
"142",
"160",
"21",
"384",
"385",
"386",
"387",
"388",
"510",
"59",
"60",
"75",
"76",
"89"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Taimur Aslam"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-324",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "01",
"PublicationMonth": "08",
"PublicationYear": "1995",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "A Taxonomy of Security Faults in the U... | [
{
"Note": "This entry has some significant overlap with other CWE entries and may need some clarification. See terminology notes.",
"Type": "Maintenance"
},
{
"Note": "The \"Origin Validation Error\" term was originally used in a 1995 thesis [REF-324]. Although not formally defined, an issue is cons... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Resultant"
}
] | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"345",
"346"
]
] | [] |
347 | Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature | Base | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-347-Diagram.png | The product does not verify, or incorrectly verifies, the cryptographic signature for data. | null | null | [
{
"CweID": "345",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity",
"Modify Application Data",
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker could gain access to sensitive data and possibly execute unauthorized code.",
"Scope": [
"Access Control",
... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | null | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In the following code, a JarFile object is created from a downloaded file.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"Example... | [
{
"Description": "Does not properly verify signatures for \"trusted\" entities.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2002-1796",
"Reference": "CVE-2002-1796"
},
{
"Description": "Insufficient verification allows spoofing.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2005-2181",... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Improperly Verified Signature",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "SEC06-J",
"EntryName": "Do not rely on the default automatic signature verification provided by URLClassLoader and java.util.jar",
"MappingFit": null,
"T... | [
"463",
"475"
] | null | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"345",
"347"
]
] | [] |
352 | Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) | Compound | Composite | Stable | /data/images/CWE-352-Diagram.png | The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor. | null | Medium | [
{
"CweID": "345",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "Web Server",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity",
"Bypass Protection Mechanism",
"Read Application Data",
"Modify Application Data",
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "The consequences will vary depending on the nature of the functionality ... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThis weakness can be detected using tools and techniques that require manual (human) analysis, such as penetration testing, threat modeling, and interactive tools that allow the tester to record and modify an active session.\n\n\nSpecifically, manual analysis can be useful for finding this... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.\n\n\nFor example, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. [REF-330]\n\n\nAnother example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which i... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This example PHP code attempts to secure the form submission process by validating that the user submitting the form has a valid session. A CSRF attack would not be prevented by this countermeasure because the at... | [
{
"Description": "Add user accounts via a URL in an img tag",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2004-1703",
"Reference": "CVE-2004-1703"
},
{
"Description": "Add user accounts via a URL in an img tag",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2004-1995",
"Reference": "CV... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "A5",
"EntryName": "Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)",
"MappingFit": "Exact",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2007"
},
{
"EntryID": "9",
"... | [
"111",
"462",
"467",
"62"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc",
"John Viega"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-44",
"Publication": "McGraw-Hill",
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2010",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "\"Si... | [
{
"Note": "\n\nThere can be a close relationship between XSS and CSRF (CWE-352). An attacker might use CSRF in order to trick the victim into submitting requests to the server in which the requests contain an XSS payload. A well-known example of this was the Samy worm on MySpace [REF-956]. The worm used XSS to ... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This is a well-known Composite of multiple weaknesses that must all occur simultaneously, although it is attack-oriented in nature. | While attack-oriented composites are supported in CWE, they have not been a focus of research. There is a chance that future research or CWE scope clarifications will change or deprecate them. Perform root-cause analysis to determine if other weaknesses allow CSRF attacks to occur, and map to those weaknesses. For example, predictable CSRF tokens might allow bypass of CSRF protection mechanisms; if this occurs, they might be better characterized as randomness/predictability weaknesses. | [
"Other"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Session Riding"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Cross Site Reference Forgery"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "XSRF"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "CSRF"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"345",
"352"
]
] | [] |
354 | Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not validate or incorrectly validates the integrity check values or "checksums" of a message. This may prevent it from detecting if the data has been modified or corrupted in transmission. | Improper validation of checksums before use results in an unnecessary risk that can easily be mitigated. The protocol specification describes the algorithm used for calculating the checksum. It is then a simple matter of implementing the calculation and verifying that the calculated checksum and the received checksum match. Improper verification of the calculated checksum and the received checksum can lead to far greater consequences. | Medium | [
{
"CweID": "345",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Application Data",
"Other"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Integrity checks usually use a secret key that helps authenticate the data origin. Skipping integrity checking generally opens up the possibility that new data from an invalid source can be injected.",
"... | null | [
{
"Description": "Ensure that the checksums present in messages are properly checked in accordance with the protocol specification before they are parsed and used.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Implementation"
],
"Strategy": ... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following example demonstrates the weakness.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "```\n\tsd = socket... | null | [
{
"EntryID": "Part 3-3",
"EntryName": "Req SR 3.1",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "ISA/IEC 62443"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Failure to check integrity check value",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CLASP"
}
] | [
"145",
"463",
"75"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Secure Software, Inc."
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-18",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2005",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "The CLASP Application Security... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"345",
"354"
]
] | [] |
924 | Improper Enforcement of Message Integrity During Transmission in a Communication Channel | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product establishes a communication channel with an endpoint and receives a message from that endpoint, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the message was not modified during transmission. | Attackers might be able to modify the message and spoof the endpoint by interfering with the data as it crosses the network or by redirecting the connection to a system under their control. | null | [
{
"CweID": "345",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If an attackers can spoof the endpoint, the attacker gains all the privileges that were intended for the original endpoint.",
"Scope": [
"Integrity",
"Confidentiality"
]
}
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | null | [
{
"Note": "This entry should be made more comprehensive in later CWE versions, as it is likely an important design flaw that underlies (or chains to) other weaknesses.",
"Type": "Maintenance"
}
] | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"345",
"924"
]
] | [] |
362 | Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition') | Class | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-362-Diagram.png | The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently. |
A race condition occurs within concurrent environments, and it is effectively a property of a code sequence. Depending on the context, a code sequence may be in the form of a function call, a small number of instructions, a series of program invocations, etc.
A race condition violates these properties, which are closely related:
- Exclusivity - the code sequence is given exclusive access to the shared resource, i.e., no other code sequence can modify properties of the shared resource before the original sequence has completed execution.
- Atomicity - the code sequence is behaviorally atomic, i.e., no other thread or process can concurrently execute the same sequence of instructions (or a subset) against the same resource.
A race condition exists when an "interfering code sequence" can still access the shared resource, violating exclusivity.
The interfering code sequence could be "trusted" or "untrusted." A trusted interfering code sequence occurs within the product; it cannot be modified by the attacker, and it can only be invoked indirectly. An untrusted interfering code sequence can be authored directly by the attacker, and typically it is external to the vulnerable product.
| Medium | [] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Sometimes",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C++",
"Prevalence": "Sometimes",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "Java",
"Prevalence": "Sometimes",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class":... | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "Programmers may assume that certain code sequences execute too quickly to be affected by an interfering code sequence; when they are not, this violates atomicity. For example, the single \"x++\" statement may appear atomic at the code ... | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Other)"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "When a race condition makes it possible to bypass a resource cleanup routine or trigger multiple initialization routines, it ma... | [
{
"Description": "Black box methods may be able to identify evidence of race conditions via methods such as multiple simultaneous connections, which may cause the software to become instable or crash. However, race conditions with very narrow timing windows would not be detectable.",
"DetectionMethodID": nu... | [
{
"Description": "In languages that support it, use synchronization primitives. Only wrap these around critical code to minimize the impact on performance.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy":... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code could be used in an e-commerce application that supports transfers between accounts. It takes the total amount of the transfer, sends it to the new account, and deducts the amount from the original acco... | [
{
"Description": "Go application for cloud management creates a world-writable sudoers file that allows local attackers to inject sudo rules and escalate privileges to root by winning a race condition.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-29527",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-29527"
},
{
... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Race Conditions",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "VNA03-J",
"EntryName": "Do not assume that a group of calls to independently atomic methods is atomic",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "The CERT Oracle Secure Cod... | [
"26",
"29"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc",
"John Viega"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-44",
"Publication": "McGraw-Hill",
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2010",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "\"Si... | [
{
"Note": "The relationship between race conditions and synchronization problems (CWE-662) needs to be further developed. They are not necessarily two perspectives of the same core concept, since synchronization is only one technique for avoiding race conditions, and synchronization can be used for other purpos... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Race Condition"
}
] | [
"File or Directory"
] | null | null | 1 | [
[
"362"
]
] | [
"367"
] |
367 | Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product checks the state of a resource before using that resource, but the resource's state can change between the check and the use in a way that invalidates the results of the check. This can cause the product to perform invalid actions when the resource is in an unexpected state. | This weakness can be security-relevant when an attacker can influence the state of the resource between check and use. This can happen with shared resources such as files, memory, or even variables in multithreaded programs. | Medium | [
{
"CweID": "362",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Alter Execution Logic",
"Unexpected State"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "The attacker can gain access to otherwise unauthorized resources.",
"Scope": [
"Integrity",
"Other"
]
},
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Application Data",
"Modify File... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "The most basic advice for TOCTOU vulnerabilities is to not perform a check before the use. This does not resolve the underlying issue of the execution of a function on a resource whose state and identity cannot be assured, but it does help to limit the false sense of security given by the chec... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code checks a file, then updates its contents.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "```\n\... | [
{
"Description": "TOCTOU in sandbox process allows installation of untrusted browser add-ons by replacing a file after it has been verified, but before it is executed",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2015-1743",
"Reference": "CVE-2015-1743"
},
{
"Description": "Chain: A multi-thre... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Time-of-check Time-of-use race condition",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "File Access Race Conditions: TOCTOU",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": n... | [
"27",
"29"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Secure Software, Inc."
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-18",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2005",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "5.4.6 Race condition in switch",
"Title": "Th... | [
{
"Note": "TOCTOU issues do not always involve symlinks, and not every symlink issue is a TOCTOU problem.",
"Type": "Relationship"
},
{
"Note": "Non-symlink TOCTOU issues are not reported frequently, but they are likely to occur in code that attempts to be secure.",
"Type": "Research Gap"
}
] | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": "The TOCTTOU acronym expands to \"Time Of Check To Time Of Use\".",
"Term": "TOCTTOU"
},
{
"Description": "The TOCCTOU acronym is most likely a typo of TOCTTOU, but it has been used in some influential documents, so the typo is repeated fairly frequently.",
"Term": "TOCCTOU"
}... | [
"File or Directory"
] | null | null | 1 | [
[
"362",
"367"
]
] | [] |
400 | Uncontrolled Resource Consumption | Class | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-400-Diagram.png | The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource. | null | High | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "The product could be operated in a system or environment with lower resource limits than expected, which might make it easier for attackers to consume all available resources.",
"Phase": "Operation"
},
{
"Note": "The product could be configured with lower resource limits than expected, wh... | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Other)"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If an attacker can trigger the allocation of the limited resources, but the number or siz... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nAutomated static analysis typically has limited utility in recognizing resource exhaustion problems, except for program-independent system resources such as files, sockets, and processes. For system resources, automated static analysis may be able to detect circumstances in which resources... | [
{
"Description": "Design throttling mechanisms into the system architecture. The best protection is to limit the amount of resources that an unauthorized user can cause to be expended. A strong authentication and access control model will help prevent such attacks from occurring in the first place. The login ap... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following example demonstrates the weakness.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "```\n\tclass Worke... | [
{
"Description": "Chain: Python library does not limit the resources used to process images that specify a very large number of bands (CWE-1284), leading to excessive memory consumption (CWE-789) or an integer overflow (CWE-190).",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-21668",
"Reference": ... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Resource exhaustion (file descriptor, disk space, sockets, ...)",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CLASP"
},
{
"EntryID": "A9",
"EntryName": "Denial of Service",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2004"
},
{
... | [
"147",
"227",
"492"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Secure Software, Inc."
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-18",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2005",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "The CLASP Application Security... | [
{
"Note": "\"Resource consumption\" could be interpreted as a consequence instead of an insecure behavior, so this entry is being considered for modification. It appears to be referenced too frequently when more precise mappings are available. Some of its children, such as CWE-771, might be better considered as... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | CWE-400 is intended for incorrect behaviors in which the product is expected to track and restrict how many resources it consumes, but CWE-400 is often misused because it is conflated with the "technical impact" of vulnerabilities in which resource consumption occurs. It is sometimes used for low-information vulnerability reports. It is a level-1 Class (i.e., a child of a Pillar). | Closely analyze the specific mistake that is causing resource consumption, and perform a CWE mapping for that mistake. Consider children/descendants such as CWE-770: Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling, CWE-771: Missing Reference to Active Allocated Resource, CWE-410: Insufficient Resource Pool, CWE-772: Missing Release of Resource after Effective Lifetime, CWE-834: Excessive Iteration, CWE-405: Asymmetric Resource Consumption (Amplification), and others. | [
"Frequent Misuse"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Resource Exhaustion"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"400"
]
] | [
"770",
"920"
] |
770 | Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated, in violation of the intended security policy for that actor. |
Code frequently has to work with limited resources, so programmers must be careful to ensure that resources are not consumed too quickly, or too easily. Without use of quotas, resource limits, or other protection mechanisms, it can be easy for an attacker to consume many resources by rapidly making many requests, or causing larger resources to be used than is needed. When too many resources are allocated, or if a single resource is too large, then it can prevent the code from working correctly, possibly leading to a denial of service.
| High | [
{
"CweID": "400",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the architecture and design phase.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Operation"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Syste... | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Other)"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "When allocating resources without limits, an attacker could prevent other systems, applications, or processes from accessing th... | [
{
"Description": "Manual static analysis can be useful for finding this weakness, but it might not achieve desired code coverage within limited time constraints. If denial-of-service is not considered a significant risk, or if there is strong emphasis on consequences such as code execution, then manual analysis... | [
{
"Description": "Clearly specify the minimum and maximum expectations for capabilities, and dictate which behaviors are acceptable when resource allocation reaches limits.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Requirements"
],
"Stra... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code allocates a socket and forks each time it receives a new connection.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"Exa... | [
{
"Description": "Chain: Python library does not limit the resources used to process images that specify a very large number of bands (CWE-1284), leading to excessive memory consumption (CWE-789) or an integer overflow (CWE-190).",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-21668",
"Reference": ... | [
{
"EntryID": "FIO04-J",
"EntryName": "Close resources when they are no longer needed",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "The CERT Oracle Secure Coding Standard for Java (2011)"
},
{
"EntryID": "SER12-J",
"EntryName": "Avoid memory and resource leaks during serialization",
"Mapping... | [
"125",
"130",
"147",
"197",
"229",
"230",
"231",
"469",
"482",
"486",
"487",
"488",
"489",
"490",
"491",
"493",
"494",
"495",
"496",
"528"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Joao Antunes",
"Nuno Ferreira Neves",
"Paulo Verissimo"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-386",
"Publication": "Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE)",
"PublicationDay": null,
"Publicati... | [
{
"Note": "This entry is different from uncontrolled resource consumption (CWE-400) in that there are other weaknesses that are related to inability to control resource consumption, such as holding on to a resource too long after use, or not correctly keeping track of active resources so that they can be manage... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"400",
"770"
]
] | [] |
920 | Improper Restriction of Power Consumption | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product operates in an environment in which power is a limited resource that cannot be automatically replenished, but the product does not properly restrict the amount of power that its operation consumes. |
In environments such as embedded or mobile devices, power can be a limited resource such as a battery, which cannot be automatically replenished by the product itself, and the device might not always be directly attached to a reliable power source. If the product uses too much power too quickly, then this could cause the device (and subsequently, the product) to stop functioning until power is restored, or increase the financial burden on the device owner because of increased power costs.
Normal operation of an application will consume power. However, in some cases, an attacker could cause the application to consume more power than intended, using components such as:
- Display
- CPU
- Disk I/O
- GPS
- Sound
- Microphone
- USB interface
| null | [
{
"CweID": "400",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Mobile",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Other)",
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "The power source could be drained, causing the application - and the entire device - to cease functioning.",
"Scope": [
"Availability"
]
}
] | null | null | null | null | [
{
"EntryID": "Part 3-3",
"EntryName": "Req SR 6.2",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "ISA/IEC 62443"
},
{
"EntryID": "Part 4-2",
"EntryName": "Req CR 6.2",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "ISA/IEC 62443"
},
{
"EntryID": "Part 4-1",
"EntryName": "Req SD-4",
... | null | null | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"400",
"920"
]
] | [] |
404 | Improper Resource Shutdown or Release | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not release or incorrectly releases a resource before it is made available for re-use. | When a resource is created or allocated, the developer is responsible for properly releasing the resource as well as accounting for all potential paths of expiration or invalidation, such as a set period of time or revocation. | Medium | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Other)",
"Varies by Context"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Most unreleased resource issues result in general software reliability problems, but if an attacker can intentionally trigger a resource leak, the attacker might be able to launch a den... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThis weakness can be detected using dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the software using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The software's operation may slow down, but it should not become unsta... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.\n\n\nFor example, languages such as Java, Ruby, and Lisp perform automatic garbage collection that releases memory for objects that have been deallocated.\n",
"Effe... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following method never closes the new file handle. Given enough time, the Finalize() method for BufferReader should eventually call Close(), but there is no guarantee as to how long this action will take. In ... | [
{
"Description": "Does not shut down named pipe connections if malformed data is sent.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-1999-1127",
"Reference": "CVE-1999-1127"
},
{
"Description": "Sockets not properly closed when attacker repeatedly connects and disconnects from server.",
"L... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Improper resource shutdown or release",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Unreleased Resource",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": "A9",
"EntryName... | [
"125",
"130",
"131",
"494",
"495",
"496",
"666"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc",
"John Viega"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-44",
"Publication": "McGraw-Hill",
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2010",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "\"Si... | [
{
"Note": "Overlaps memory leaks, asymmetric resource consumption, malformed input errors.",
"Type": "Relationship"
}
] | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | [
{
"Description": "Improper release or shutdown of resources can be primary to resource exhaustion, performance, and information confidentiality problems to name a few.",
"Ordinality": "Primary"
},
{
"Description": "Improper release or shutdown of resources can be resultant from improper error handli... | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"404"
]
] | [
"401",
"459",
"763",
"772"
] |
401 | Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime | Variant | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-401-Diagram.png | The product does not sufficiently track and release allocated memory after it has been used, making the memory unavailable for reallocation and reuse. | null | Medium | [
{
"CweID": "404",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C++",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "\n\nMemory leaks have two common and sometimes overlapping causes:\n\n\n - Error conditions and other exceptional circumstances often triggered by improper handling of malformed data or unexpectedly interrupted sessions.\n\n - Confusion over which part of the program is responsible for freeing the ... | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart",
"DoS: Instability",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Most memory leaks result in general product reliability problems, but if an attacker can intentionally tri... | [
{
"Description": "Fuzz testing (fuzzing) is a powerful technique for generating large numbers of diverse inputs - either randomly or algorithmically - and dynamically invoking the code with those inputs. Even with random inputs, it is often capable of generating unexpected results such as crashes, memory corrup... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nChoose a language or tool that provides automatic memory management, or makes manual memory management less error-prone.\n\n\nFor example, glibc in Linux provides protection against free of invalid pointers.\n\n\nWhen using Xcode to target OS X or iOS, enable automatic reference counting (... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following C function leaks a block of allocated memory if the call to read() does not return the expected number of bytes:",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
}... | [
{
"Description": "Memory leak because function does not free() an element of a data structure.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2005-3119",
"Reference": "CVE-2005-3119"
},
{
"Description": "Memory leak when counter variable is not decremented.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CV... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Memory leak",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Memory Leak",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Failure to deallocate data",
... | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"Secure Software, Inc."
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-18",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2005",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "The CLASP Application Security... | [
{
"Note": "This is often a resultant weakness due to improper handling of malformed data or early termination of sessions.",
"Type": "Relationship"
},
{
"Note": "\"memory leak\" has sometimes been used to describe other kinds of issues, e.g. for information leaks in which the contents of memory are ... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Variant level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Resultant"
}
] | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Memory Leak"
}
] | [
"Memory"
] | [
"Memory Management"
] | null | 1 | [
[
"404",
"401"
]
] | [] |
459 | Incomplete Cleanup | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not properly "clean up" and remove temporary or supporting resources after they have been used. | null | null | [
{
"CweID": "404",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Other",
"Read Application Data",
"Modify Application Data",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Other)"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "It is possible to overflow the number of temporary files because directories typically have limits on the number of files allowed. Th... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Temporary files and other supporting resources should be deleted/released immediately after they are no longer needed.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design",
"Implementation"
],
"Strat... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "Stream resources in a Java application should be released in a finally block, otherwise an exception thrown before the call to close() would result in an unreleased I/O resource. In the example below, the close()... | [
{
"Description": "World-readable temporary file not deleted after use.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2000-0552",
"Reference": "CVE-2000-0552"
},
{
"Description": "Temporary file not deleted after use, leaking database usernames and passwords.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Incomplete Cleanup",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "A10",
"EntryName": "Insecure Configuration Management",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2004"
},
{
"EntryID": "FIO42-C",
... | null | null | [
{
"Note": "CWE-459 is a child of CWE-404 because, while CWE-404 covers any type of improper shutdown or release of a resource, CWE-459 deals specifically with a multi-step shutdown process in which a crucial step for \"proper\" cleanup is omitted or impossible. That is, CWE-459 deals specifically with a cleanup... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Insufficient Cleanup"
}
] | null | [
"File Processing"
] | null | 1 | [
[
"404",
"459"
]
] | [] |
763 | Release of Invalid Pointer or Reference | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product attempts to return a memory resource to the system, but it calls the wrong release function or calls the appropriate release function incorrectly. |
This weakness can take several forms, such as:
- The memory was allocated, explicitly or implicitly, via one memory management method and deallocated using a different, non-compatible function (CWE-762).
- The function calls or memory management routines chosen are appropriate, however they are used incorrectly, such as in CWE-761.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "404",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C++",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Memory",
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart",
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "This weakness may result in the corruption of memory, and perhaps instructions, possibly leading to a crash. If the corrupted memory can be effecti... | [
{
"Description": "Fuzz testing (fuzzing) is a powerful technique for generating large numbers of diverse inputs - either randomly or algorithmically - and dynamically invoking the code with those inputs. Even with random inputs, it is often capable of generating unexpected results such as crashes, memory corrup... | [
{
"Description": "Only call matching memory management functions. Do not mix and match routines. For example, when you allocate a buffer with malloc(), dispose of the original pointer with free().",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Implem... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code attempts to tokenize a string and place it into an array using the strsep function, which inserts a \\0 byte in place of whitespace or a tab character. After finishing the loop, each string in the AP ar... | [
{
"Description": "function \"internally calls 'calloc' and returns a pointer at an index... inside the allocated buffer. This led to freeing invalid memory.\"",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2019-11930",
"Reference": "CVE-2019-11930"
}
] | [
{
"EntryID": "SFP12",
"EntryName": "Faulty Memory Release",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "Software Fault Patterns"
}
] | null | [
{
"Authors": null,
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-657",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "boost C++ Library Smart Pointers",
"URL": "https://www.boost... | [
{
"Note": "The view-1000 subtree that is associated with this weakness needs additional work. Several entries will likely be created in this branch. Currently the focus is on free() of memory, but delete and other related release routines may require the creation of intermediate entries that are not specific to... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | [
"Memory"
] | null | null | 1 | [
[
"404",
"763"
]
] | [] |
772 | Missing Release of Resource after Effective Lifetime | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not release a resource after its effective lifetime has ended, i.e., after the resource is no longer needed. | When a resource is not released after use, it can allow attackers to cause a denial of service by causing the allocation of resources without triggering their release. Frequently-affected resources include memory, CPU, disk space, power or battery, etc. | High | [
{
"CweID": "404",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Mobile",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Other)"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker that can influence the allocation of resources that are not properly released could deplete the available resource pool and prevent all other processes from accessing the same type of resource.",
... | null | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.\n\n\nFor example, languages such as Java, Ruby, and Lisp perform automatic garbage collection that releases memory for objects that have been deallocated.\n",
"Effe... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following method never closes the new file handle. Given enough time, the Finalize() method for BufferReader should eventually call Close(), but there is no guarantee as to how long this action will take. In ... | [
{
"Description": "Chain: anti-virus product encounters a malformed file but returns from a function without closing a file descriptor (CWE-775) leading to file descriptor consumption (CWE-400) and failed scans.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2007-0897",
"Reference": "CVE-2007-0897"
},... | [
{
"EntryID": "FIO42-C",
"EntryName": "Close files when they are no longer needed",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Abstract",
"TaxonomyName": "CERT C Secure Coding"
},
{
"EntryID": "MEM31-C",
"EntryName": "Free dynamically allocated memory when no longer needed",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Abst... | [
"469"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Object Management Group (OMG)"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-961",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": "01",
"PublicationYear": "2016",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "ASCRM-CWE-772",
"Title": "Automated ... | [
{
"Note": "\"Resource exhaustion\" (CWE-400) is currently treated as a weakness, although it is more like a category of weaknesses that all have the same type of consequence. While this entry treats CWE-400 as a parent in view 1000, the relationship is probably more appropriately described as a chain.",
"Ty... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"404",
"772"
]
] | [] |
407 | Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity | Class | Simple | Incomplete | null | An algorithm in a product has an inefficient worst-case computational complexity that may be detrimental to system performance and can be triggered by an attacker, typically using crafted manipulations that ensure that the worst case is being reached. | null | Low | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Other)"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "The typical consequence is CPU consumption, but memory consumption and consumption of other resources can also occur.",
"Sc... | null | null | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This example attempts to check if an input string is a \"sentence\" [REF-1164].",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"Ex... | [
{
"Description": "C++ library for image metadata has \"quadratic complexity\" issue with unnecessarily repetitive parsing each time an invalid character is encountered",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-32617",
"Reference": "CVE-2021-32617"
},
{
"Description": "Python has \"qua... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Algorithmic Complexity",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
}
] | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"Scott A. Crosby",
"Dan S. Wallach"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-395",
"Publication": "Proceedings of the 12th USENIX Security Symposium",
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": "08",
"PublicationYear": "2003",
"Publisher": null,... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": "Used when the algorithmic complexity is related to the square of the number of inputs (N^2)",
"Term": "Quadratic Complexity"
}
] | null | [
"Cryptography"
] | null | 1 | [
[
"407"
]
] | [
"1333"
] |
1333 | Inefficient Regular Expression Complexity | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product uses a regular expression with an inefficient, possibly exponential worst-case computational complexity that consumes excessive CPU cycles. | Some regular expression engines have a feature called "backtracking". If the token cannot match, the engine "backtracks" to a position that may result in a different token that can match.
Backtracking becomes a weakness if all of these conditions are met:
- The number of possible backtracking attempts are exponential relative to the length of the input.
- The input can fail to match the regular expression.
- The input can be long enough.
Attackers can create crafted inputs that intentionally cause the regular expression to use excessive backtracking in a way that causes the CPU consumption to spike. | High | [
{
"CweID": "407",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "A RegEx can be easy to create and read using unbounded matching characters, but the programmer might not consider the risk of excessive backtracking.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)"
],
"Likelihood": [
"High"
],
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Availability"
]
}
] | null | [
{
"Description": "Use regular expressions that do not support backtracking, e.g. by removing nested quantifiers.",
"Effectiveness": "High",
"EffectivenessNotes": "This is one of the few effective solutions when using user-provided regular expressions.",
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Ar... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This example attempts to check if an input string is a \"sentence\" [REF-1164].",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"Ex... | [
{
"Description": "server allows ReDOS with crafted User-Agent strings, due to overlapping capture groups that cause excessive backtracking.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2020-5243",
"Reference": "CVE-2020-5243"
},
{
"Description": "npm package for user-agent parser prone to ReD... | null | [
"492"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Scott A. Crosby"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-1180",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": "08",
"PublicationYear": "2003",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Regular Expression Denial of Servi... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": "ReDoS is an abbreviation of \"Regular expression Denial of Service\".",
"Term": "ReDoS"
},
{
"Description": "While this term is attack-focused, this is commonly used to describe the weakness.",
"Term": "Regular Expression Denial of Service"
},
{
"Description": "This ter... | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"407",
"1333"
]
] | [] |
436 | Interpretation Conflict | Class | Simple | Incomplete | null | Product A handles inputs or steps differently than Product B, which causes A to perform incorrect actions based on its perception of B's state. | This is generally found in proxies, firewalls, anti-virus software, and other intermediary devices that monitor, allow, deny, or modify traffic based on how the client or server is expected to behave. | null | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Unexpected State",
"Varies by Context"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Integrity",
"Other"
]
}
] | null | null | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The paper \"Insertion, Evasion, and Denial of Service: Eluding Network Intrusion Detection\" [REF-428] shows that OSes varied widely in how they manage unusual packets, which made it difficult or impossible for i... | [
{
"Description": "Bypass filters or poison web cache using requests with multiple Content-Length headers, a non-standard behavior.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2005-1215",
"Reference": "CVE-2005-1215"
},
{
"Description": "Anti-virus product allows bypass via Content-Type and C... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Multiple Interpretation Error (MIE)",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "27",
"EntryName": "HTTP Response Smuggling",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "WASC"
}
] | [
"105",
"273",
"34"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Steve Christey"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-427",
"Publication": "Bugtraq",
"PublicationDay": "03",
"PublicationMonth": "11",
"PublicationYear": "2005",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "On Interpretation Conflict Vuln... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"436"
]
] | [
"444"
] |
444 | Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling') | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product acts as an intermediary HTTP agent
(such as a proxy or firewall) in the data flow between two
entities such as a client and server, but it does not
interpret malformed HTTP requests or responses in ways that
are consistent with how the messages will be processed by
those entities that are at the ultimate destination. |
HTTP requests or responses ("messages") can be malformed or unexpected in ways that cause web servers or clients to interpret the messages in different ways than intermediary HTTP agents such as load balancers, reverse proxies, web caching proxies, application firewalls, etc. For example, an adversary may be able to add duplicate or different header fields that a client or server might interpret as one set of messages, whereas the intermediary might interpret the same sequence of bytes as a different set of messages. For example, discrepancies can arise in how to handle duplicate headers like two Transfer-encoding (TE) or two Content-length (CL), or the malicious HTTP message will have different headers for TE and CL.
The inconsistent parsing and interpretation of messages can allow the adversary to "smuggle" a message to the client/server without the intermediary being aware of it.
This weakness is usually the result of the usage of outdated or incompatible HTTP protocol versions in the HTTP agents.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "436",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Web Based",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Unexpected State",
"Hide Activities",
"Bypass Protection Mechanism"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker could create HTTP messages to exploit a number of weaknesses including 1) the message can trick the web server to associate a URL with another URL's webpag... | null | [
{
"Description": "Use a web server that employs a strict HTTP parsing procedure, such as Apache [REF-433].",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Implementation"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Description": "Use only SSL communicat... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In the following example, a malformed HTTP request is sent to a website that includes a proxy server and a web server with the intent of poisoning the cache to associate one webpage with another malicious webpage... | [
{
"Description": "SSL/TLS-capable proxy allows HTTP smuggling when used in tandem with HTTP/1.0 services, due to inconsistent interpretation and input sanitization of HTTP messages within the body of another message",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-24766",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-2476... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "HTTP Request Smuggling",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "26",
"EntryName": "HTTP Request Smuggling",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "WASC"
},
{
"EntryID": "27",
"EntryName": "HTTP Response Smuggling",... | [
"273",
"33"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Chaim Linhart",
"Amit Klein",
"Ronen Heled",
"Steve Orrin"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-433",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section... | [
{
"Note": "Request smuggling can be performed due to a multiple interpretation error, where the target is an intermediary or monitor, via a consistency manipulation (Transfer-Encoding and Content-Length headers).",
"Type": "Theoretical"
}
] | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "HTTP Request Smuggling"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "HTTP Response Smuggling"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "HTTP Smuggling"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"436",
"444"
]
] | [] |
610 | Externally Controlled Reference to a Resource in Another Sphere | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product uses an externally controlled name or reference that resolves to a resource that is outside of the intended control sphere. | null | null | [] | null | [
{
"Note": "COMMISSION: This weakness refers to an incorrect design related to an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data",
"Modify Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An adversary could read or modify data, depending on how the resource is intended to be used.",
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality",
"Integrity"
]
},
{
"Impact": [
... | null | null | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code is a Java servlet that will receive a GET request with a url parameter in the request to redirect the browser to the address specified in the url parameter. The servlet will retrieve the url pa... | [
{
"Description": "An email client does not block loading of remote objects in a nested document.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-3032",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-3032"
},
{
"Description": "Chain: a learning management tool debugger uses external input to locate previous session... | null | [
"219"
] | null | [
{
"Note": "This is a general class of weakness, but most research is focused on more specialized cases, such as path traversal (CWE-22) and symlink following (CWE-61). A symbolic link has a name; in general, it appears like any other file in the file system. However, the link includes a reference to another fil... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | This CWE entry is a level-1 Class (i.e., a child of a Pillar). It might have lower-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"610"
]
] | [
"1021",
"384",
"601",
"611",
"918"
] |
1021 | Improper Restriction of Rendered UI Layers or Frames | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The web application does not restrict or incorrectly restricts frame objects or UI layers that belong to another application or domain, which can lead to user confusion about which interface the user is interacting with. | A web application is expected to place restrictions on whether it is allowed to be rendered within frames, iframes, objects, embed or applet elements. Without the restrictions, users can be tricked into interacting with the application when they were not intending to. | null | [
{
"CweID": "610",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Web Based",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity",
"Bypass Protection Mechanism",
"Read Application Data",
"Modify Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker can trick a user into performing actions that are masked and hidden from the user's view. The impa... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThe use of X-Frame-Options allows developers of web content to restrict the usage of their application within the form of overlays, frames, or iFrames. The developer can indicate from which domains can frame the content.\n\n\nThe concept of X-Frame-Options is well documented, but implement... | null | [
{
"Description": "E-mail preview feature in a desktop application allows clickjacking attacks via a crafted e-mail message",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2017-7440",
"Reference": "CVE-2017-7440"
},
{
"Description": "Hardware/firmware product has insufficient clickjacking protect... | null | [
"103",
"181",
"222",
"504",
"506",
"587",
"654"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Andrew Horton"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-35",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Clickjacking For Shells",
"URL": "ht... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Clickjacking"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "UI Redress Attack"
},
{
"Description": "\"Tapjacking\" is similar to clickjacking, except it is used for mobile applications in which the user \"taps\" the application instead of performing a mouse click.",
... | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"610",
"1021"
]
] | [] |
384 | Session Fixation | Compound | Composite | Incomplete | null | Authenticating a user, or otherwise establishing a new user session, without invalidating any existing session identifier gives an attacker the opportunity to steal authenticated sessions. |
Such a scenario is commonly observed when:
- A web application authenticates a user without first invalidating the existing session, thereby continuing to use the session already associated with the user.
- An attacker is able to force a known session identifier on a user so that, once the user authenticates, the attacker has access to the authenticated session.
- The application or container uses predictable session identifiers.
In the generic exploit of session fixation vulnerabilities, an attacker creates a new session on a web application and records the associated session identifier. The attacker then causes the victim to associate, and possibly authenticate, against the server using that session identifier, giving the attacker access to the user's account through the active session. | null | [
{
"CweID": "610",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Access Control"
]
}
] | null | [
{
"Description": "Invalidate any existing session identifiers prior to authorizing a new user session.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Description": "For platforms such... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following example shows a snippet of code from a J2EE web application where the application authenticates users with LoginContext.login() without first calling HttpSession.invalidate().",
"Language": ... | [
{
"Description": "Website software for game servers does not proprerly terminate user sessions, allowing for possible session fixation",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-2820",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-2820"
}
] | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Session Fixation",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": "A3",
"EntryName": "Broken Authentication and Session Management",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2004"
},
{
... | [
"196",
"21",
"31",
"39",
"59",
"60",
"61"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Katrina Tsipenyuk",
"Brian Chess",
"Gary McGraw"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-6",
"Publication": "NIST Workshop on Software Security Assurance Tools Techniques and Metrics",
"PublicationDay": "07",
"PublicationMonth": "11",
"Public... | [
{
"Note": "Other attack vectors include DNS poisoning and related network based attacks where an attacker causes the user to visit a malicious site by redirecting a request for a valid site. Network based attacks typically involve a physical presence on the victim's network or control of a compromised machine o... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This is a well-known Composite of multiple weaknesses that must all occur simultaneously, although it is attack-oriented in nature. | While attack-oriented composites are supported in CWE, they have not been a focus of research. There is a chance that future research or CWE scope clarifications will change or deprecate them. Perform root-cause analysis to determine which weaknesses allow session fixation to occur, and map to those weaknesses. For example, predictable session identifiers might enable session fixation attacks to succeed; if this occurs, they might be better characterized as randomness/predictability weaknesses. | [
"Other"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"610",
"384"
]
] | [] |
601 | URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect') | Base | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-601-Diagram.png | The web application accepts a user-controlled input that specifies a link to an external site, and uses that link in a redirect. | null | Low | [
{
"CweID": "610",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Web Based",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the architecture and design phase.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Bypass Protection Mechanism",
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "The user may be redirected to an untrusted page that contains malware which may then compromise the user's machine. This will expose the user to extensive risk and the user's... | [
{
"Description": "Since this weakness does not typically appear frequently within a single software package, manual white box techniques may be able to provide sufficient code coverage and reduction of false positives if all potentially-vulnerable operations can be assessed within limited time constraints.",
... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nAssume all input is malicious. Use an \"accept known good\" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.\n\n\nWhen perfo... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code obtains a URL from the query string and then redirects the user to that URL.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": n... | [
{
"Description": "URL parameter loads the URL into a frame and causes it to appear to be part of a valid page.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2005-4206",
"Reference": "CVE-2005-4206"
},
{
"Description": "An open redirect vulnerability in the search script in the software allows ... | [
{
"EntryID": "38",
"EntryName": "URl Redirector Abuse",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "WASC"
},
{
"EntryID": "SFP24",
"EntryName": "Tainted input to command",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "Software Fault Patterns"
}
] | [
"178"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Craig A. Shue",
"Andrew J. Kalafut",
"Minaxi Gupta"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-483",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
... | [
{
"Note": "Whether this issue poses a vulnerability will be subject to the intended behavior of the application. For example, a search engine might intentionally provide redirects to arbitrary URLs.",
"Type": "Other"
}
] | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Open Redirect"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Cross-site Redirect"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Cross-domain Redirect"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Unvalidated Redirect"
}
] | null | null | [
"Phishing is a general term for deceptive attempts to coerce private information from users that will be used for identity theft."
] | 1 | [
[
"610",
"601"
]
] | [] |
611 | Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product processes an XML document that can contain XML entities with URIs that resolve to documents outside of the intended sphere of control, causing the product to embed incorrect documents into its output. |
XML documents optionally contain a Document Type Definition (DTD), which, among other features, enables the definition of XML entities. It is possible to define an entity by providing a substitution string in the form of a URI. The XML parser can access the contents of this URI and embed these contents back into the XML document for further processing.
By submitting an XML file that defines an external entity with a file:// URI, an attacker can cause the processing application to read the contents of a local file. For example, a URI such as "file:///c:/winnt/win.ini" designates (in Windows) the file C:\Winnt\win.ini, or file:///etc/passwd designates the password file in Unix-based systems. Using URIs with other schemes such as http://, the attacker can force the application to make outgoing requests to servers that the attacker cannot reach directly, which can be used to bypass firewall restrictions or hide the source of attacks such as port scanning.
Once the content of the URI is read, it is fed back into the application that is processing the XML. This application may echo back the data (e.g. in an error message), thereby exposing the file contents.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "610",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "XML",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Web Based",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data",
"Read Files or Directories"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If the attacker is able to include a crafted DTD and a default entity resolver is enabled, the attacker may be able to access arbitrary files on the system.",
"Scope": [
"Confiden... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Many XML parsers and validators can be configured to disable external entity expansion.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Implementation",
"System Configuration"
],
"Strategy": null
}
] | null | [
{
"Description": "Recruiter software allows reading arbitrary files using XXE",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-42745",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-42745"
},
{
"Description": "A browser control can allow remote attackers to determine the existence of files via Javascript containing... | [
{
"EntryID": "43",
"EntryName": "XML External Entities",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "WASC"
},
{
"EntryID": "SFP24",
"EntryName": "Tainted input to command",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "Software Fault Patterns"
}
] | [
"221"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"OWASP"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-496",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "XML External Entity (XXE) Processing",
"URL... | [
{
"Note": "CWE-918 (SSRF) and CWE-611 (XXE) are closely related, because they both involve web-related technologies and can launch outbound requests to unexpected destinations. However, XXE can be performed client-side, or in other contexts in which the software is not acting directly as a server, so the \"Serv... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": "An acronym used for the term \"XML eXternal Entities\"",
"Term": "XXE"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"610",
"611"
]
] | [] |
918 | Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) | Base | Simple | Incomplete | /data/images/CWE-918-Diagram.png | The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination. | null | null | [
{
"CweID": "610",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "Web Server",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
]
},
{
"Impact": [
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Integrity"
]
},
{
"I... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | null | null | [
{
"Description": "Chain: LLM integration framework has prompt injection (CWE-1427) that allows an attacker to force the service to retrieve data from an arbitrary URL, essentially providing SSRF (CWE-918) and potentially injecting content into downstream tasks.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CV... | null | [
"664"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Alexander Polyakov",
"Dmitry Chastukhin"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-913",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "26",
"PublicationMonth": "07",
"PublicationYear": "2012",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "SSRF ... | [
{
"Note": "CWE-918 (SSRF) and CWE-611 (XXE) are closely related, because they both involve web-related technologies and can launch outbound requests to unexpected destinations. However, XXE can be performed client-side, or in other contexts in which the software is not acting directly as a server, so the \"Serv... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": "Cross Site Port Attack",
"Term": "XSPA"
},
{
"Description": "Server-Side Request Forgery",
"Term": "SSRF"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"610",
"918"
]
] | [] |
662 | Improper Synchronization | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product utilizes multiple threads or processes to allow temporary access to a shared resource that can only be exclusive to one process at a time, but it does not properly synchronize these actions, which might cause simultaneous accesses of this resource by multiple threads or processes. |
Synchronization refers to a variety of behaviors and mechanisms that allow two or more independently-operating processes or threads to ensure that they operate on shared resources in predictable ways that do not interfere with each other. Some shared resource operations cannot be executed atomically; that is, multiple steps must be guaranteed to execute sequentially, without any interference by other processes. Synchronization mechanisms vary widely, but they may include locking, mutexes, and semaphores. When a multi-step operation on a shared resource cannot be guaranteed to execute independent of interference, then the resulting behavior can be unpredictable. Improper synchronization could lead to data or memory corruption, denial of service, etc.
| null | [] | null | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Application Data",
"Read Application Data",
"Alter Execution Logic"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Integrity",
"Confidentiality",
"Other"
]
}
] | null | [
{
"Description": "Use industry standard APIs to synchronize your code.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Implementation"
],
"Strategy": null
}
] | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following function attempts to acquire a lock in order to perform operations on a shared resource.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyT... | [
{
"Description": "Chain: improper locking (CWE-667) leads to race condition (CWE-362), as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-1782",
"Reference": "CVE-2021-1782"
},
{
"Description": "Attacker provides invalid address to a memory-reading functi... | [
{
"EntryID": "SIG00-C",
"EntryName": "Mask signals handled by noninterruptible signal handlers",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CERT C Secure Coding"
},
{
"EntryID": "SIG31-C",
"EntryName": "Do not access shared objects in signal handlers",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Abstract",
... | [
"25",
"26",
"27",
"29"
] | null | [
{
"Note": "Deeper research is necessary for synchronization and related mechanisms, including locks, mutexes, semaphores, and other mechanisms. Multiple entries are dependent on this research, which includes relationships to concurrency, race conditions, reentrant functions, etc. CWE-662 and its children - incl... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | This CWE entry is a level-1 Class (i.e., a child of a Pillar). It might have lower-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"662"
]
] | [
"667"
] |
667 | Improper Locking | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not properly acquire or release a lock on a resource, leading to unexpected resource state changes and behaviors. |
Locking is a type of synchronization behavior that ensures that multiple independently-operating processes or threads do not interfere with each other when accessing the same resource. All processes/threads are expected to follow the same steps for locking. If these steps are not followed precisely - or if no locking is done at all - then another process/thread could modify the shared resource in a way that is not visible or predictable to the original process. This can lead to data or memory corruption, denial of service, etc.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "662",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | null | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Inconsistent locking discipline can lead to deadlock.",
"Scope": [
"Availability"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Use industry standard APIs to implement locking mechanism.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Implementation"
],
"Strategy": "Libraries or Frameworks"
}
] | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In the following Java snippet, methods are defined to get and set a long field in an instance of a class that is shared across multiple threads. Because operations on double and long are nonatomic in Java, concur... | [
{
"Description": "Chain: improper locking (CWE-667) leads to race condition (CWE-362), as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-1782",
"Reference": "CVE-2021-1782"
},
{
"Description": "Attacker provides invalid address to a memory-reading functi... | [
{
"EntryID": "CON31-C",
"EntryName": "Do not destroy a mutex while it is locked",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Abstract",
"TaxonomyName": "CERT C Secure Coding"
},
{
"EntryID": "POS48-C",
"EntryName": "Do not unlock or destroy another POSIX thread's mutex",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Abstrac... | [
"25",
"26",
"27"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Object Management Group (OMG)"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-962",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": "01",
"PublicationYear": "2016",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "ASCSM-CWE-667",
"Title": "Automated ... | [
{
"Note": "Deeper research is necessary for synchronization and related mechanisms, including locks, mutexes, semaphores, and other mechanisms. Multiple entries are dependent on this research, which includes relationships to concurrency, race conditions, reentrant functions, etc. CWE-662 and its children - incl... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"662",
"667"
]
] | [] |
665 | Improper Initialization | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not initialize or incorrectly initializes a resource, which might leave the resource in an unexpected state when it is accessed or used. | This can have security implications when the associated resource is expected to have certain properties or values, such as a variable that determines whether a user has been authenticated or not. | Medium | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "This weakness can occur in code paths that are not well-tested, such as rare error conditions. This is because the use of uninitialized data would be noticed as a bug during frequently-used functionality.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Operation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Memory",
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "When reusing a resource such as memory or a program variable, the original contents of that resource may not be cleared before it is sent to an untrusted party.",
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThis weakness can be detected using dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the software using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The software's operation may slow down, but it should not become unsta... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.\n\n\nFor example, in Java, if the programmer does not explicitly initialize a variable, then the code could produce a compile-time error (if the variable is local) or a... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "Here, a boolean initiailized field is consulted to ensure that initialization tasks are only completed once. However, the field is mistakenly set to true during static initialization, so the initialization code i... | [
{
"Description": "chain: an invalid value prevents a library file from being included, skipping initialization of key variables, leading to resultant eval injection.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2001-1471",
"Reference": "CVE-2001-1471"
},
{
"Description": "Improper error check... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Incorrect initialization",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "ARR02-C",
"EntryName": "Explicitly specify array bounds, even if implicitly defined by an initializer",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CERT C Secure Cod... | [
"26",
"29"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"mercy"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-436",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": "01",
"PublicationYear": "2006",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Exploiting Uninitialized Data",
"URL": "h... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | This CWE entry is a level-1 Class (i.e., a child of a Pillar). It might have lower-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Resultant"
}
] | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"665"
]
] | [
"1188",
"908",
"909"
] |
1188 | Initialization of a Resource with an Insecure Default | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product initializes or sets a resource with a default that is intended to be changed by the administrator, but the default is not secure. |
Developers often choose default values that leave the product as open and easy to use as possible out-of-the-box, under the assumption that the administrator can (or should) change the default value. However, this ease-of-use comes at a cost when the default is insecure and the administrator does not change it.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "665",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | null | null | null | null | null | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code attempts to login a user using credentials from a POST request:",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleC... | [
{
"Description": "insecure default variable initialization in BIOS firmware for a hardware board allows DoS",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-36349",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-36349"
},
{
"Description": "A generic database browser interface has a default mode that exposes a web s... | null | [
"665"
] | null | [
{
"Note": "This entry improves organization of concepts under initialization. The typical CWE model is to cover \"Missing\" and \"Incorrect\" behaviors. Arguably, this entry could be named as \"Incorrect\" instead of \"Insecure.\" This might be changed in the near future.",
"Type": "Maintenance"
}
] | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
}
] | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"665",
"1188"
]
] | [] |
908 | Use of Uninitialized Resource | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product uses or accesses a resource that has not been initialized. | When a resource has not been properly initialized, the product may behave unexpectedly. This may lead to a crash or invalid memory access, but the consequences vary depending on the type of resource and how it is used within the product. | Medium | [
{
"CweID": "665",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Memory",
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "When reusing a resource such as memory or a program variable, the original contents of that resource may not be cleared before it is sent to an untrusted party.",
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
... | null | [
{
"Description": "Explicitly initialize the resource before use. If this is performed through an API function or standard procedure, follow all required steps.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Implementation"
],
"Strategy": null... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "Here, a boolean initiailized field is consulted to ensure that initialization tasks are only completed once. However, the field is mistakenly set to true during static initialization, so the initialization code i... | [
{
"Description": "Chain: Creation of the packet client occurs before initialization is complete (CWE-696) resulting in a read from uninitialized memory (CWE-908), causing memory corruption.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2019-9805",
"Reference": "CVE-2019-9805"
},
{
"Description... | [
{
"EntryID": "EXP33-C",
"EntryName": "Do not read uninitialized memory",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Abstract",
"TaxonomyName": "CERT C Secure Coding"
}
] | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"mercy"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-436",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": "01",
"PublicationYear": "2006",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Exploiting Uninitialized Data",
"URL": "h... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Resultant"
}
] | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"665",
"908"
]
] | [] |
909 | Missing Initialization of Resource | Class | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product does not initialize a critical resource. | Many resources require initialization before they can be properly used. If a resource is not initialized, it could contain unpredictable or expired data, or it could be initialized to defaults that are invalid. This can have security implications when the resource is expected to have certain properties or values. | Medium | [
{
"CweID": "665",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Memory",
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "When reusing a resource such as memory or a program variable, the original contents of that resource may not be cleared before it is sent to an untrusted party.",
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
... | null | [
{
"Description": "Explicitly initialize the resource before use. If this is performed through an API function or standard procedure, follow all specified steps.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Implementation"
],
"Strategy": nul... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "Here, a boolean initiailized field is consulted to ensure that initialization tasks are only completed once. However, the field is mistakenly set to true during static initialization, so the initialization code i... | [
{
"Description": "A variable that has its value set in a conditional statement is sometimes used when the conditional fails, sometimes causing data leakage",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2020-20739",
"Reference": "CVE-2020-20739"
},
{
"Description": "Chain: Bypass of access rest... | null | null | null | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Resultant"
}
] | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"665",
"909"
]
] | [] |
668 | Exposure of Resource to Wrong Sphere | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product exposes a resource to the wrong control sphere, providing unintended actors with inappropriate access to the resource. |
Resources such as files and directories may be inadvertently exposed through mechanisms such as insecure permissions, or when a program accidentally operates on the wrong object. For example, a program may intend that private files can only be provided to a specific user. This effectively defines a control sphere that is intended to prevent attackers from accessing these private files. If the file permissions are insecure, then parties other than the user will be able to access those files.
A separate control sphere might effectively require that the user can only access the private files, but not any other files on the system. If the program does not ensure that the user is only requesting private files, then the user might be able to access other files on the system.
In either case, the end result is that a resource has been exposed to the wrong party.
| null | [] | null | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Operation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": [
"High"
],
"Note": "An adversary that gains access to a resource exposed to a wrong sphere could potentially retrieve private data from that resource, thus breaking the intended confidentiality of that data.",
"Scope": [
... | null | null | null | null | null | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"MITRE"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-1287",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "28",
"PublicationMonth": "06",
"PublicationYear": "2022",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "Details of Problematic Mappings",
"Title": "Supplemental De... | [
{
"Note": "A \"control sphere\" is a set of resources and behaviors that are accessible to a single actor, or a group of actors. A product's security model will typically define multiple spheres, possibly implicitly. For example, a server might define one sphere for \"administrators\" who can create new user ac... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | CWE-668 is high-level and is often misused as a catch-all when lower-level CWE IDs might be applicable. It is sometimes used for low-information vulnerability reports [REF-1287]. It is a level-1 Class (i.e., a child of a Pillar). It is not useful for trend analysis. | Closely analyze the specific mistake that is allowing the resource to be exposed, and perform a CWE mapping for that mistake. | [
"Frequent Misuse",
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"668"
]
] | [
"134",
"426",
"427",
"428",
"552"
] |
134 | Use of Externally-Controlled Format String | Base | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-134-Diagram.png | The product uses a function that accepts a format string as an argument, but the format string originates from an external source. | null | High | [
{
"CweID": "668",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C++",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "Perl",
"Prevalence": "Rarely",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "The programmer rarely intends for a format string to be externally-controlled at all. This weakness is frequently introduced in code that constructs log messages, where a constant format string is omitted.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": "In cases such as localization and interna... | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Memory"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Format string problems allow for information disclosure which can severely simplify exploitation of the program.",
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality"
]
},
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Memory",
"Execute Unauthorize... | [
{
"Description": "This weakness can often be detected using automated static analysis tools. Many modern tools use data flow analysis or constraint-based techniques to minimize the number of false positives.",
"DetectionMethodID": "DM-1",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"Metho... | [
{
"Description": "Choose a language that is not subject to this flaw.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Requirements"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Description": "Ensure that all format string functions are passed a static st... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following program prints a string provided as an argument.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "```\... | [
{
"Description": "format string in Perl program",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2002-1825",
"Reference": "CVE-2002-1825"
},
{
"Description": "format string in bad call to syslog function",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2001-0717",
"Reference": "CVE-2001-07... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Format string vulnerability",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Format String",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Format strin... | [
"135",
"67"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Steve Christey"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-116",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Format String Vulnerabilities in Perl ... | [
{
"Note": "\n\nThis weakness is possible in any programming language that support format strings.\n",
"Type": "Applicable Platform"
},
{
"Note": "\n\nIn some circumstances, such as internationalization, the set of format strings is externally controlled by design. If the source of these format strin... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
}
] | null | [
"Memory"
] | [
"Logging",
"Error Handling",
"String Processing"
] | null | 1 | [
[
"668",
"134"
]
] | [] |
426 | Untrusted Search Path | Base | Simple | Stable | null | The product searches for critical resources using an externally-supplied search path that can point to resources that are not under the product's direct control. |
This might allow attackers to execute their own programs, access unauthorized data files, or modify configuration in unexpected ways. If the product uses a search path to locate critical resources such as programs, then an attacker could modify that search path to point to a malicious program, which the targeted product would then execute. The problem extends to any type of critical resource that the product trusts.
Some of the most common variants of untrusted search path are:
- In various UNIX and Linux-based systems, the PATH environment variable may be consulted to locate executable programs, and LD_PRELOAD may be used to locate a separate library.
- In various Microsoft-based systems, the PATH environment variable is consulted to locate a DLL, if the DLL is not found in other paths that appear earlier in the search order.
| High | [
{
"CweID": "668",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Not OS-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Operating_System"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Gain Privileges or Assume Identity",
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "There is the potential for arbitrary code execution with privileges of the vulnerable program.",
"Scope": [
"Integrity",
"Confidentiality",
"A... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nUse monitoring tools that examine the software's process as it interacts with the operating system and the network. This technique is useful in cases when source code is unavailable, if the software was not developed by you, or if you want to verify that the build phase did not introduce a... | [
{
"Description": "Hard-code the search path to a set of known-safe values (such as system directories), or only allow them to be specified by the administrator in a configuration file. Do not allow these settings to be modified by an external party. Be careful to avoid related weaknesses such as CWE-426 and CWE... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This program is intended to execute a command that lists the contents of a restricted directory, then performs other actions. Assume that it runs with setuid privileges in order to bypass the permissions check by... | [
{
"Description": "Application relies on its PATH environment variable to find and execute program.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-1999-1120",
"Reference": "CVE-1999-1120"
},
{
"Description": "Database application relies on its PATH environment variable to find and execute progra... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Untrusted Search Path",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Relative path library search",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CLASP"
},
{
"EntryID": "ENV03-C",
"EntryName": "Sanitize the e... | [
"38"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Secure Software, Inc."
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-18",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2005",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "The CLASP Application Security... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is often confused with another closely-related entry about search paths. | CWE-426 and CWE-427 are often misused because they both mention search paths, although CWE-426 is focused on attacker control of the search path itself, while CWE-427 applies when the attacker cannot modify the search path but can write to one of the locations specified in the search path. Also, this entry is classified in a part of CWE's hierarchy that does not have sufficiently low-level coverage, which might reflect a lack of classification-oriented weakness research in the software security community. Conduct careful root cause analysis to determine the original mistake that led to this weakness. If closer analysis reveals that this weakness is appropriate, then this might be the best available CWE to use for mapping. If no other option is available, then it is acceptable to map to this CWE. | [
"Frequent Misinterpretation",
"Abstraction",
"Other"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Untrusted Path"
}
] | [
"System Process"
] | [
"Program Invocation",
"Code Libraries"
] | null | 1 | [
[
"668",
"426"
]
] | [] |
427 | Uncontrolled Search Path Element | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product uses a fixed or controlled search path to find resources, but one or more locations in that path can be under the control of unintended actors. |
Although this weakness can occur with any type of resource, it is frequently introduced when a product uses a directory search path to find executables or code libraries, but the path contains a directory that can be modified by an attacker, such as "/tmp" or the current working directory.
In Windows-based systems, when the LoadLibrary or LoadLibraryEx function is called with a DLL name that does not contain a fully qualified path, the function follows a search order that includes two path elements that might be uncontrolled:
- the directory from which the program has been loaded
- the current working directory
In some cases, the attack can be conducted remotely, such as when SMB or WebDAV network shares are used.
One or more locations in that path could include the Windows drive root or its subdirectories. This often exists in Linux-based code assuming the controlled nature of the root directory (/) or its subdirectories (/etc, etc), or a code that recursively accesses the parent directory. In Windows, the drive root and some of its subdirectories have weak permissions by default, which makes them uncontrolled.
In some Unix-based systems, a PATH might be created that contains an empty element, e.g. by splicing an empty variable into the PATH. This empty element can be interpreted as equivalent to the current working directory, which might be an untrusted search element.
In software package management frameworks (e.g., npm, RubyGems, or PyPi), the framework may identify dependencies on third-party libraries or other packages, then consult a repository that contains the desired package. The framework may search a public repository before a private repository. This could be exploited by attackers by placing a malicious package in the public repository that has the same name as a package from the private repository. The search path might not be directly under control of the developer relying on the framework, but this search order effectively contains an untrusted element.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "668",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Not OS-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Operating_System"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality",
"Integrity",
"Availability"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Hard-code the search path to a set of known-safe values (such as system directories), or only allow them to be specified by the administrator in a configuration file. Do not allow these settings to be modified by an external party. Be careful to avoid related weaknesses such as CWE-426 and CWE... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code is from a web application that allows users access to an interface through which they can update their password on the system. In this environment, user passwords can be managed using the Netwo... | [
{
"Description": "chain: a change in an underlying package causes the gettext function to use implicit initialization with a hard-coded path (CWE-1419) under the user-writable C:\\ drive, introducing an untrusted search path element (CWE-427) that enables spoofing of messages.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Uncontrolled Search Path Element",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
}
] | [
"38",
"471"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Georgi Guninski"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-409",
"Publication": "Bugtraq",
"PublicationDay": "18",
"PublicationMonth": "09",
"PublicationYear": "2000",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Double clicking on MS Office d... | [
{
"Note": "Unlike untrusted search path (CWE-426), which inherently involves control over the definition of a control sphere (i.e., modification of a search path), this entry concerns a fixed control sphere in which some part of the sphere may be under attacker control (i.e., the search path cannot be modified ... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is often confused with another closely-related entry about search paths. | CWE-426 and CWE-427 are often misused because they both mention search paths, although CWE-426 is focused on attacker control of the search path itself, while CWE-427 applies when the attacker cannot modify the search path but can write to one of the locations specified in the search path. Also, this entry is classified in a part of CWE's hierarchy that does not have sufficiently low-level coverage, which might reflect a lack of classification-oriented weakness research in the software security community. Conduct careful root cause analysis to determine the original mistake that led to this weakness. If closer analysis reveals that this weakness is appropriate, then this might be the best available CWE to use for mapping. If no other option is available, then it is acceptable to map to this CWE. | [
"Frequent Misinterpretation",
"Abstraction",
"Other"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": "This term is one of several that are used to describe exploitation of untrusted search path elements in Windows systems, which received wide attention in August 2010. From a weakness perspective, the term is imprecise because it can apply to both CWE-426 and CWE-427.",
"Term": "DLL preload... | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"668",
"427"
]
] | [] |
428 | Unquoted Search Path or Element | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product uses a search path that contains an unquoted element, in which the element contains whitespace or other separators. This can cause the product to access resources in a parent path. | If a malicious individual has access to the file system, it is possible to elevate privileges by inserting such a file as "C:\Program.exe" to be run by a privileged program making use of WinExec. | null | [
{
"CweID": "668",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "Windows NT",
"Prevalence": "Sometimes",
"Type": "Operating_System"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "macOS",
"Prevalence": "Rarely",
"Typ... | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality",
"Integrity",
"Availability"
]
}
] | null | [
{
"Description": "Properly quote the full search path before executing a program on the system.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Implementation"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Description": "\n\nAssume all input is malicious.... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following example demonstrates the weakness.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "```\n\tUINT errCod... | [
{
"Description": "Small handful of others. Program doesn't quote the \"C:\\Program Files\\\" path when calling a program to be executed - or any other path with a directory or file whose name contains a space - so attacker can put a malicious program.exe into C:.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Unquoted Search Path or Element",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
}
] | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"Mark Dowd",
"John McDonald",
"Justin Schuh"
],
"Edition": "1st Edition",
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-62",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2006",
"Publisher": "Addison Wesley",
"Sectio... | [
{
"Note": "\n\nThis weakness could apply to any OS that supports spaces in filenames, especially any OS that make it easy for a user to insert spaces into filenames or folders, such as Windows. While spaces are technically supported in Unix, the practice is generally avoided. .\n",
"Type": "Applicable Platf... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | [
"Program Invocation"
] | null | 1 | [
[
"668",
"428"
]
] | [] |
552 | Files or Directories Accessible to External Parties | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product makes files or directories accessible to unauthorized actors, even though they should not be. |
Web servers, FTP servers, and similar servers may store a set of files underneath a "root" directory that is accessible to the server's users. Applications may store sensitive files underneath this root without also using access control to limit which users may request those files, if any. Alternately, an application might package multiple files or directories into an archive file (e.g., ZIP or tar), but the application might not exclude sensitive files that are underneath those directories.
In cloud technologies and containers, this weakness might present itself in the form of misconfigured storage accounts that can be read or written by a public or anonymous user.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "668",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Not Technology-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
},
{
"Class": "Cloud Computing",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence"... | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the architecture and design phase.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": "OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the ar... | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Files or Directories",
"Modify Files or Directories"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality",
"Integrity"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "When storing data in the cloud (e.g., S3 buckets, Azure blobs, Google Cloud Storage, etc.), use the provider's controls to disable public access.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Implementation",
"System Configur... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following Azure command updates the settings for a storage account:",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCod... | [
{
"Description": "Data file under web root.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2005-1835",
"Reference": "CVE-2005-1835"
}
] | [
{
"EntryID": "A10",
"EntryName": "Insecure Configuration Management",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2004"
},
{
"EntryID": "FIO15-C",
"EntryName": "Ensure that file operations are performed in a secure directory",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyNa... | [
"150",
"639"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Center for Internet Security"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-1307",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "16",
"PublicationMonth": "08",
"PublicationYear": "2022",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "Section 3.7",
"Title": "CIS Microsof... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | [
"File or Directory"
] | null | null | 1 | [
[
"668",
"552"
]
] | [] |
669 | Incorrect Resource Transfer Between Spheres | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not properly transfer a resource/behavior to another sphere, or improperly imports a resource/behavior from another sphere, in a manner that provides unintended control over that resource. | null | null | [] | null | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Operation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Application Data",
"Modify Application Data",
"Unexpected State"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Confidentiality",
"Integrity"
]
}
] | null | null | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code demonstrates the unrestricted upload of a file with a Java servlet and a path traversal vulnerability. The action attribute of an HTML form is sending the upload file request to the Java servle... | [
{
"Description": "Chain: router's firmware update procedure uses curl with \"-k\" (insecure) option that disables certificate validation (CWE-295), allowing adversary-in-the-middle (AITM) compromise with a malicious firmware image (CWE-494).",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-22909",
"... | null | null | null | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | [
"A \"control sphere\" is a set of resources and behaviors that are accessible to a single actor, or a group of actors. A product's security model will typically define multiple spheres, possibly implicitly. For example, a server might define one sphere for \"administrators\" who can create new user accounts with su... | 1 | [
[
"669"
]
] | [
"212",
"434",
"494",
"565",
"829"
] |
212 | Improper Removal of Sensitive Information Before Storage or Transfer | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product stores, transfers, or shares a resource that contains sensitive information, but it does not properly remove that information before the product makes the resource available to unauthorized actors. |
Resources that may contain sensitive data include documents, packets, messages, databases, etc. While this data may be useful to an individual user or small set of users who share the resource, it may need to be removed before the resource can be shared outside of the trusted group. The process of removal is sometimes called cleansing or scrubbing.
For example, a product for editing documents might not remove sensitive data such as reviewer comments or the local pathname where the document is stored. Or, a proxy might not remove an internal IP address from headers before making an outgoing request to an Internet site.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "669",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Operation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Read Files or Directories",
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Sensitive data may be exposed to an unauthorized actor in another control sphere. This may have a wide range of secondary consequences which will depend on what data is exposed. One possibi... | null | [
{
"Description": "Clearly specify which information should be regarded as private or sensitive, and require that the product offers functionality that allows the user to cleanse the sensitive information from the resource before it is published or exported to other parties.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"Eff... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code either generates a public HTML user information page or a JSON response containing the same user information.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
... | [
{
"Description": "Cryptography library does not clear heap memory before release",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2019-3733",
"Reference": "CVE-2019-3733"
},
{
"Description": "Some image editors modify a JPEG image, but the original EXIF thumbnail image is left intact within the J... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Cross-Boundary Cleansing Infoleak",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
}
] | [
"168"
] | null | [
{
"Note": "This entry is intended to be different from resultant information leaks, including those that occur from improper buffer initialization and reuse, improper encryption, interaction errors, and multiple interpretation errors. This entry could be regarded as a privacy leak, depending on the type of info... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Primary"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Resultant"
}
] | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"669",
"212"
]
] | [] |
434 | Unrestricted Upload of File with Dangerous Type | Base | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-434-Diagram.png | The product allows the upload or transfer of dangerous file types that are automatically processed within its environment. | null | Medium | [
{
"CweID": "669",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "ASP.NET",
"Prevalence": "Sometimes",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "PHP",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"... | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": "OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the architecture and design phase.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Arbitrary code execution is possible if an uploaded file is interpreted and executed as code by the recipient. This is especially true for web-server extensions such as .asp and .php because these file types ... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nAccording to SOAR, the following detection techniques may be useful:\n\n```\n\t\tCost effective for partial coverage:\n```\n\n\t\tWeb Application Scanner\n\t\tWeb Services Scanner\n\t\tDatabase Scanners",
"DetectionMethodID": null,
"Effectiveness": "SOAR Partial",
"Effectivenes... | [
{
"Description": "Generate a new, unique filename for an uploaded file instead of using the user-supplied filename, so that no external input is used at all.[REF-422] [REF-423]",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code intends to allow a user to upload a picture to the web server. The HTML code that drives the form on the user end has an input field of type \"file\".",
"Language": null,
"Natur... | [
{
"Description": "PHP-based FAQ management app does not check the MIME type for uploaded images",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-5227",
"Reference": "CVE-2023-5227"
},
{
"Description": "Web-based mail product stores \".shtml\" attachments that could contain SSI",
"Link": ... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Unrestricted File Upload",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "A3",
"EntryName": "Malicious File Execution",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2007"
},
{
"EntryID": "ASCSM-CWE-434",... | [
"1"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Richard Stanway (r1CH)"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-422",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Dynamic File Uploads, Security... | [
{
"Note": "\n\nThis can have a chaining relationship with incomplete denylist / permissive allowlist errors when the product tries, but fails, to properly limit which types of files are allowed (CWE-183, CWE-184).\n\n\nThis can also overlap multiple interpretation errors for intermediaries, e.g. anti-virus prod... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": "This can be primary when there is no check for the file type at all.",
"Ordinality": "Primary"
},
{
"Description": "This can be resultant when use of double extensions (e.g. \".php.gif\") bypasses a check.",
"Ordinality": "Resultant"
},
{
"Description": "This can be res... | [
{
"Description": "Used in vulnerability databases and elsewhere, but it is insufficiently precise. The phrase could be interpreted as the lack of restrictions on the size or number of uploaded files, which is a resource consumption issue.",
"Term": "Unrestricted File Upload"
}
] | [
"File or Directory"
] | [
"File Processing"
] | null | 1 | [
[
"669",
"434"
]
] | [] |
494 | Download of Code Without Integrity Check | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product downloads source code or an executable from a remote location and executes the code without sufficiently verifying the origin and integrity of the code. | An attacker can execute malicious code by compromising the host server, performing DNS spoofing, or modifying the code in transit. | Medium | [
{
"CweID": "669",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the architecture and design phase.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands",
"Alter Execution Logic",
"Other"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Executing untrusted code could compromise the control flow of the program. The untrusted code could execute attacker-controlled commands, read or modify sensitive... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThis weakness can be detected using tools and techniques that require manual (human) analysis, such as penetration testing, threat modeling, and interactive tools that allow the tester to record and modify an active session.\n\n\nSpecifically, manual static analysis is typically required t... | [
{
"Description": "Perform proper forward and reverse DNS lookups to detect DNS spoofing.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": "This is only a partial solution since it will not prevent your code from being modified on the hosting site or in transit.",
"MitigationID": "MIT-42",
"Phase":... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This example loads an external class from a local subdirectory.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "```... | [
{
"Description": "Satellite phone does not validate its firmware image.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2019-9534",
"Reference": "CVE-2019-9534"
},
{
"Description": "Chain: router's firmware update procedure uses curl with \"-k\" (insecure) option that disables certificate valida... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Invoking untrusted mobile code",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "CLASP"
},
{
"EntryID": "SEC06-J",
"EntryName": "Do not rely on the default automatic signature verification provided by URLClassLoader and java.util.jar",
"MappingFit": null,
"T... | [
"184",
"185",
"186",
"187",
"533",
"538",
"657",
"662",
"691",
"692",
"693",
"695"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Microsoft"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-454",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Introduction to Code Signing",
"URL": "... | [
{
"Note": "This is critical for mobile code, but it is likely to become more and more common as developers continue to adopt automated, network-based product distributions and upgrades. Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) might introduce additional subtleties. Common exploitation scenarios may include ad server compro... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"669",
"494"
]
] | [] |
565 | Reliance on Cookies without Validation and Integrity Checking | Base | Simple | Incomplete | /data/images/CWE-565-Diagram.png | The product relies on the existence or values of cookies when performing security-critical operations, but it does not properly ensure that the setting is valid for the associated user. | null | null | [
{
"CweID": "669",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | null | [
{
"Note": "OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the architecture and design phase.",
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Application Data",
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Attackers can easily modify cookies, within the browser or by implementing the client-side code outside of the browser. Reliance on cookies without detailed validation and int... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Avoid using cookie data for a security-related decision.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Description": "Perform thorough input validation (i.e.: serve... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code excerpt reads a value from a browser cookie to determine the role of the user.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText":... | [
{
"Description": "e-dating application allows admin privileges by setting the admin cookie to 1.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2008-5784",
"Reference": "CVE-2008-5784"
}
] | [
{
"EntryID": "SFP29",
"EntryName": "Faulty endpoint authentication",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "Software Fault Patterns"
}
] | [
"226",
"31",
"39"
] | null | [
{
"Note": "This problem can be primary to many types of weaknesses in web applications. A developer may perform proper validation against URL parameters while assuming that attackers cannot modify cookies. As a result, the program might skip basic input validation to enable cross-site scripting, SQL injection, ... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"669",
"565"
]
] | [] |
829 | Inclusion of Functionality from Untrusted Control Sphere | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | The product imports, requires, or includes executable functionality (such as a library) from a source that is outside of the intended control sphere. |
When including third-party functionality, such as a web widget, library, or other source of functionality, the product must effectively trust that functionality. Without sufficient protection mechanisms, the functionality could be malicious in nature (either by coming from an untrusted source, being spoofed, or being modified in transit from a trusted source). The functionality might also contain its own weaknesses, or grant access to additional functionality and state information that should be kept private to the base system, such as system state information, sensitive application data, or the DOM of a web application.
This might lead to many different consequences depending on the included functionality, but some examples include injection of malware, information exposure by granting excessive privileges or permissions to the untrusted functionality, DOM-based XSS vulnerabilities, stealing user's cookies, or open redirect to malware (CWE-601).
| null | [
{
"CweID": "669",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | null | [
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker could insert malicious functionality into the program by causing the program to download code that the attacker has placed into the untrusted control sphere, such as a malicious web site.",
"S... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nAccording to SOAR, the following detection techniques may be useful:\n\n```\n\t\tCost effective for partial coverage:\n```\n\n\t\tBytecode Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis",
"DetectionMethodID": null,
"Effectiveness": "SOAR Partial",
"E... | [
{
"Description": "Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": "MIT-4",
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Stra... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This login webpage includes a weather widget from an external website:",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode... | [
{
"Description": "Product does not properly reject DTDs in SOAP messages, which allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files, send HTTP requests to intranet servers, or cause a denial of service.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2010-2076",
"Reference": "CVE-2010-2076"
},
{
"De... | null | [
"175",
"201",
"228",
"251",
"252",
"253",
"263",
"538",
"549",
"640",
"660",
"695",
"698"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"OWASP"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-45",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "OWASP Enterprise Security API (ESAPI) Project",
... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"669",
"829"
]
] | [] |
670 | Always-Incorrect Control Flow Implementation | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The code contains a control flow path that does not reflect the algorithm that the path is intended to implement, leading to incorrect behavior any time this path is navigated. | This weakness captures cases in which a particular code segment is always incorrect with respect to the algorithm that it is implementing. For example, if a C programmer intends to include multiple statements in a single block but does not include the enclosing braces (CWE-483), then the logic is always incorrect. This issue is in contrast to most weaknesses in which the code usually behaves correctly, except when it is externally manipulated in malicious ways. | null | [] | null | [
{
"Note": "This issue typically appears in rarely-tested code, since the \"always-incorrect\" nature will be detected as a bug during normal usage.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Other",
"Alter Execution Logic"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Other"
]
}
] | null | null | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "This code queries a server and displays its status when a request comes from an authorized IP address.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyT... | [
{
"Description": "virtual interrupt controller in a virtualization product allows crash of host by writing a certain invalid value to a register, which triggers a fatal error instead of returning an error code",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-3011",
"Reference": "CVE-2021-3011"
}
] | null | null | null | [
{
"Note": "This node could possibly be split into lower-level nodes. \"Early Return\" is for returning control to the caller too soon (e.g., CWE-584). \"Excess Return\" is when control is returned too far up the call stack (CWE-600, CWE-395). \"Improper control limitation\" occurs when the product maintains con... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"670"
]
] | [
"617"
] |
617 | Reachable Assertion | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product contains an assert() or similar statement that can be triggered by an attacker, which leads to an application exit or other behavior that is more severe than necessary. |
While assertion is good for catching logic errors and reducing the chances of reaching more serious vulnerability conditions, it can still lead to a denial of service.
For example, if a server handles multiple simultaneous connections, and an assert() occurs in one single connection that causes all other connections to be dropped, this is a reachable assertion that leads to a denial of service.
| null | [
{
"CweID": "670",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | null | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "An attacker that can trigger an assert statement can still lead to a denial of service if the relevant code can be triggered by an attacker, and if the scope of the assert() extends beyond the attacker's own session."... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Make sensitive open/close operation non reachable by directly user-controlled data (e.g. open/close resources)",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Implementation"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Description": "P... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In the excerpt below, an AssertionError (an unchecked exception) is thrown if the user hasn't entered an email address in an HTML form.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": nul... | [
{
"Description": "Chain: function in web caching proxy does not correctly check a return value (CWE-253) leading to a reachable assertion (CWE-617)",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-49286",
"Reference": "CVE-2023-49286"
},
{
"Description": "FTP server allows remote attackers t... | [
{
"EntryID": "MET01-J",
"EntryName": "Never use assertions to validate method arguments",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "The CERT Oracle Secure Coding Standard for Java (2011)"
},
{
"EntryID": "SFP3",
"EntryName": "Use of an improper API",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName"... | null | null | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Ordinality": "Resultant"
}
] | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "assertion failure"
}
] | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"670",
"617"
]
] | [] |
672 | Operation on a Resource after Expiration or Release | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product uses, accesses, or otherwise operates on a resource after that resource has been expired, released, or revoked. | null | null | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Mobile",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Operation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Application Data",
"Read Application Data"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If a released resource is subsequently reused or reallocated, then an attempt to use the original resource might allow access to sensitive data that is associated with a different user or ent... | null | null | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code shows a simple example of a use after free error:",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode":... | [
{
"Description": "Chain: race condition (CWE-362) might allow resource to be released before operating on it, leading to NULL dereference (CWE-476)",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2009-3547",
"Reference": "CVE-2009-3547"
}
] | [
{
"EntryID": "SFP15",
"EntryName": "Faulty Resource Use",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "Software Fault Patterns"
},
{
"EntryID": "FIO46-C",
"EntryName": "Do not access a closed file",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Abstract",
"TaxonomyName": "CERT C Secure Coding"
},
{
"E... | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"Object Management Group (OMG)"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-962",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": "01",
"PublicationYear": "2016",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "ASCSM-CWE-672",
"Title": "Automated ... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"672"
]
] | [
"415",
"416",
"613"
] |
415 | Double Free | Variant | Simple | Draft | /data/images/CWE-415-Diagram.png | The product calls free() twice on the same memory address. | null | High | [
{
"CweID": "672",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C++",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Memory",
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "\n\nWhen a program calls free() twice with the same argument, the program's memory management data structures may become corrupted, potentially leading to the reading or modification of... | [
{
"Description": "Fuzz testing (fuzzing) is a powerful technique for generating large numbers of diverse inputs - either randomly or algorithmically - and dynamically invoking the code with those inputs. Even with random inputs, it is often capable of generating unexpected results such as crashes, memory corrup... | [
{
"Description": "Choose a language that provides automatic memory management.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Description": "Ensure that each allocation is freed only ... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code shows a simple example of a double free vulnerability.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleC... | [
{
"Description": "Chain: Signal handler contains too much functionality (CWE-828), introducing a race condition (CWE-362) that leads to a double free (CWE-415).",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2006-5051",
"Reference": "CVE-2006-5051"
},
{
"Description": "Double free resultant fro... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "DFREE - Double-Free Vulnerability",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Double Free",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Doubly f... | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"Michael Howard",
"David LeBlanc",
"John Viega"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-44",
"Publication": "McGraw-Hill",
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": "2010",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "\"Si... | [
{
"Note": "This is usually resultant from another weakness, such as an unhandled error or race condition between threads. It could also be primary to weaknesses such as buffer overflows.",
"Type": "Relationship"
},
{
"Note": "It could be argued that Double Free would be most appropriately located as... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Variant level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Double-free"
}
] | [
"Memory"
] | null | null | 1 | [
[
"672",
"415"
]
] | [] |
416 | Use After Free | Variant | Simple | Stable | /data/images/CWE-416-Diagram.png | The product reuses or references memory after it has been freed. At some point afterward, the memory may be allocated again and saved in another pointer, while the original pointer references a location somewhere within the new allocation. Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory "belongs" to the code that operates on the new pointer. | null | High | [
{
"CweID": "672",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C++",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Modify Memory"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "The use of previously freed memory may corrupt valid data, if the memory area in question has been allocated and used properly elsewhere.",
"Scope": [
"Integrity"
]
},
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or ... | [
{
"Description": "Fuzz testing (fuzzing) is a powerful technique for generating large numbers of diverse inputs - either randomly or algorithmically - and dynamically invoking the code with those inputs. Even with random inputs, it is often capable of generating unexpected results such as crashes, memory corrup... | [
{
"Description": "Choose a language that provides automatic memory management.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Architecture and Design"
],
"Strategy": "Language Selection"
},
{
"Description": "When freeing pointers, be ... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following example demonstrates the weakness.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "```\n\t#include <s... | [
{
"Description": "Chain: an operating system kernel has insufficent resource locking (CWE-413) leading to a use after free (CWE-416).",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-20141",
"Reference": "CVE-2022-20141"
},
{
"Description": "Chain: two threads in a web browser use the same r... | [
{
"EntryID": "Part 4-1",
"EntryName": "Req SI-1",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "ISA/IEC 62443"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Use After Free",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Using freed memor... | null | [
{
"Authors": [
"Katrina Tsipenyuk",
"Brian Chess",
"Gary McGraw"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-6",
"Publication": "NIST Workshop on Software Security Assurance Tools Techniques and Metrics",
"PublicationDay": "07",
"PublicationMonth": "11",
"Public... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Variant level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | [
{
"Description": "If the product accesses a previously-freed pointer, then it means that a separate weakness or error already occurred previously, such as a race condition, an unexpected or poorly handled error condition, confusion over which part of the program is responsible for freeing the memory, performing... | [
{
"Description": "a pointer that no longer points to valid memory, often after it has been freed",
"Term": "Dangling pointer"
},
{
"Description": "commonly used acronym for Use After Free",
"Term": "UAF"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Use-After-Free"
}
] | [
"Memory"
] | null | null | 1 | [
[
"672",
"416"
]
] | [] |
613 | Insufficient Session Expiration | Base | Simple | Incomplete | null | According to WASC, "Insufficient Session Expiration is when a web site permits an attacker to reuse old session credentials or session IDs for authorization." | null | null | [
{
"CweID": "672",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | null | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Architecture and Design"
},
{
"Note": "REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"Bypass Protection Mechanism"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": null,
"Scope": [
"Access Control"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Set sessions/credentials expiration date.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Implementation"
],
"Strategy": null
}
] | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following snippet was taken from a J2EE web.xml deployment descriptor in which the session-timeout parameter is explicitly defined (the default value depends on the container). In this case the value is set t... | null | [
{
"EntryID": "47",
"EntryName": "Insufficient Session Expiration",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "WASC"
}
] | null | null | [
{
"Note": "The lack of proper session expiration may improve the likely success of certain attacks. For example, an attacker may intercept a session ID, possibly via a network sniffer or Cross-site Scripting attack. Although short session expiration times do not help if a stolen token is immediately used, they ... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"672",
"613"
]
] | [] |
674 | Uncontrolled Recursion | Class | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not properly control the amount of recursion that takes place, consuming excessive resources, such as allocated memory or the program stack. | null | null | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "The uncontrolled recursion is often due to an improper or missing conditional",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "Resources including CPU, memory, and stack memory could be rapidly consumed or exhausted, eventually leading to an exit or crash.",
"Scope": [
"Availability"
... | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "Ensure an end condition will be reached under all logic conditions. The end condition may include testing against the depth of recursion and exiting with an error if the recursion goes too deep. The complexity of the end condition contributes to the effectiveness of this action.",
"Effecti... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "In this example a mistake exists in the code where the exit condition contained in flg is never called. This results in the function calling itself over and over again until the stack is exhausted.",
"Lan... | [
{
"Description": "Deeply nested arrays trigger stack exhaustion.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2007-1285",
"Reference": "CVE-2007-1285"
},
{
"Description": "Self-referencing pointers create infinite loop and resultant stack exhaustion.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVEReco... | [
{
"EntryID": "A9",
"EntryName": "Denial of Service",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Specific",
"TaxonomyName": "OWASP Top Ten 2004"
},
{
"EntryID": "SFP13",
"EntryName": "Unrestricted Consumption",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "Software Fault Patterns"
},
{
"EntryID": "AS... | [
"230",
"231"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Object Management Group (OMG)"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-961",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": "01",
"PublicationYear": "2016",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": "ASCRM-CWE-674",
"Title": "Automated ... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed-with-Review | This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate | Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Stack Exhaustion"
}
] | [
"CPU"
] | null | null | 1 | [
[
"674"
]
] | [
"776"
] |
776 | Improper Restriction of Recursive Entity References in DTDs ('XML Entity Expansion') | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product uses XML documents and allows their structure to be defined with a Document Type Definition (DTD), but it does not properly control the number of recursive definitions of entities. | If the DTD contains a large number of nested or recursive entities, this can lead to explosive growth of data when parsed, causing a denial of service. | Medium | [
{
"CweID": "674",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "XML",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
},
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Operation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Other)"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If parsed, recursive entity references allow the attacker to expand data exponentially, quickly consuming all system resources.",
"Scope": [
"Availability"
]
}
] | [
{
"Description": "Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, th... | [
{
"Description": "If possible, prohibit the use of DTDs or use an XML parser that limits the expansion of recursive DTD entities.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Operation"
],
"Strategy": null
},
{
"Description": "Befor... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The DTD and the very brief XML below illustrate what is meant by an XML bomb. The ZERO entity contains one character, the letter A. The choice of entity name ZERO is being used to indicate length equivalent to th... | [
{
"Description": "XEE in XML-parsing library.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2008-3281",
"Reference": "CVE-2008-3281"
},
{
"Description": "XML bomb / XEE in enterprise communication product.",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2011-3288",
"Reference": "CVE-20... | [
{
"EntryID": "44",
"EntryName": "XML Entity Expansion",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "WASC"
}
] | [
"197"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Amit Klein"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-676",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": "16",
"PublicationMonth": "12",
"PublicationYear": "2002",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "Multiple vendors XML parser (and SOAP/We... | null | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | [
{
"Description": "XEE is the acronym commonly used for XML Entity Expansion.",
"Term": "XEE"
},
{
"Description": null,
"Term": "Billion Laughs Attack"
},
{
"Description": "While the \"XML Bomb\" term was used in the early years of knowledge of this issue, the XEE term seems to be more co... | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"674",
"776"
]
] | [] |
682 | Incorrect Calculation | Pillar | Simple | Draft | null | The product performs a calculation that generates incorrect or unintended results that are later used in security-critical decisions or resource management. | When product performs a security-critical calculation incorrectly, it might lead to incorrect resource allocations, incorrect privilege assignments, or failed comparisons among other things. Many of the direct results of an incorrect calculation can lead to even larger problems such as failed protection mechanisms or even arbitrary code execution. | High | [] | [
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Not Technology-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Technology"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If the incorrect calculation causes the program to move into an unexpected state, it may lead to a crash or impairment of service.",
"Scope": [
"Availability"
]
},
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Crash... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThis weakness can be detected using tools and techniques that require manual (human) analysis, such as penetration testing, threat modeling, and interactive tools that allow the tester to record and modify an active session.\n\n\nSpecifically, manual static analysis is useful for evaluatin... | [
{
"Description": "Understand your programming language's underlying representation and how it interacts with numeric calculation. Pay close attention to byte size discrepancies, precision, signed/unsigned distinctions, truncation, conversion and casting between types, \"not-a-number\" calculations, and how your... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following image processing code allocates a table for images.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "`... | [
{
"Description": "chain: mobile phone Bluetooth implementation does not include offset when calculating packet length (CWE-682), leading to out-of-bounds write (CWE-787)",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2020-0022",
"Reference": "CVE-2020-0022"
},
{
"Description": "substitution ove... | [
{
"EntryID": "FLP32-C",
"EntryName": "Prevent or detect domain and range errors in math functions",
"MappingFit": "CWE More Abstract",
"TaxonomyName": "CERT C Secure Coding"
},
{
"EntryID": "INT07-C",
"EntryName": "Use only explicitly signed or unsigned char type for numeric values",
... | [
"128",
"129"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"David LeBlanc",
"Niels Dekker"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-106",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "SafeInt",
"UR... | [
{
"Note": "\n\nWeaknesses related to this Pillar appear to be under-studied, especially with respect to classification schemes. Input from academic and other communities could help identify and resolve gaps or organizational difficulties within CWE.\n",
"Type": "Research Gap"
}
] | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Discouraged | This CWE entry is extremely high-level, a Pillar. In many cases, lower-level children or descendants are more appropriate. However, sometimes this weakness is forced to be used due to the lack of in-depth weakness research. See Research Gaps. | Where feasible, consider children or descendants of this entry instead. | [
"Abstraction"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"682"
]
] | [
"131",
"190",
"191",
"193",
"369"
] |
131 | Incorrect Calculation of Buffer Size | Base | Simple | Draft | null | The product does not correctly calculate the size to be used when allocating a buffer, which could lead to a buffer overflow. | null | High | [
{
"CweID": "682",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C++",
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": null,
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart",
"Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands",
"Read Memory",
"Modify Memory"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "If the incorrect calculation is used in the context of memory allocation, then the software may create a buffer that is smalle... | [
{
"Description": "\n\nThis weakness can often be detected using automated static analysis tools. Many modern tools use data flow analysis or constraint-based techniques to minimize the number of false positives.\n\n\nAutomated static analysis generally does not account for environmental considerations when repo... | [
{
"Description": "When allocating a buffer for the purpose of transforming, converting, or encoding an input, allocate enough memory to handle the largest possible encoding. For example, in a routine that converts \"&\" characters to \"&\" for HTML entity encoding, the output buffer needs to be at least 5 t... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following code allocates memory for a maximum number of widgets. It then gets a user-specified number of widgets, making sure that the user does not request too many. It then initializes the elements of the a... | [
{
"Description": "Font rendering library does not properly handle assigning a signed short value to an unsigned long (CWE-195), leading to an integer wraparound (CWE-190), causing too small of a buffer (CWE-131), leading to an out-of-bounds write (CWE-787).",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-20... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Other length calculation error",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": "INT30-C",
"EntryName": "Ensure that unsigned integer operations do not wrap",
"MappingFit": "Imprecise",
"TaxonomyName": "CERT C Secure Coding"
},
{... | [
"100",
"47"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"David LeBlanc",
"Niels Dekker"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-106",
"Publication": null,
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": null,
"PublicationYear": null,
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "SafeInt",
"UR... | [
{
"Note": "\n\nThis is a broad category. Some examples include:\n\n\n - simple math errors,\n\n - incorrectly updating parallel counters,\n\n - not accounting for size differences when \"transforming\" one input to another format (e.g. URL canonicalization or other transformation that can generate a result t... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | null | null | null | null | null | null | 1 | [
[
"682",
"131"
]
] | [] |
190 | Integer Overflow or Wraparound | Base | Simple | Stable | /data/images/CWE-190-Diagram.png | The product performs a calculation that can
produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic
assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than
the original value. This occurs when an integer value is
incremented to a value that is too large to store in the
associated representation. When this occurs, the value may
become a very small or negative number. | null | Medium | [
{
"CweID": "682",
"Nature": "ChildOf",
"Ordinal": "Primary",
"ViewID": "1003"
}
] | [
{
"Class": null,
"Name": "C",
"Prevalence": "Often",
"Type": "Language"
},
{
"Class": "Not Language-Specific",
"Name": null,
"Prevalence": "Undetermined",
"Type": "Language"
}
] | [
{
"Note": "This weakness may become security critical when determining the offset or size in behaviors such as memory allocation, copying, and concatenation.",
"Phase": "Implementation"
}
] | [
{
"Impact": [
"DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart",
"DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)",
"DoS: Instability"
],
"Likelihood": null,
"Note": "This weakness can generally lead to undefined behavior and therefore crashes. When the calculated result is used for resource allocation, this weak... | [
{
"Description": "This weakness can often be detected using automated static analysis tools. Many modern tools use data flow analysis or constraint-based techniques to minimize the number of false positives.",
"DetectionMethodID": "DM-1",
"Effectiveness": "High",
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"Met... | [
{
"Description": "Ensure that all protocols are strictly defined, such that all out-of-bounds behavior can be identified simply, and require strict conformance to the protocol.",
"Effectiveness": null,
"EffectivenessNotes": null,
"MitigationID": null,
"Phase": [
"Requirements"
],
"... | [
{
"Entries": [
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": null,
"IntroText": "The following image processing code allocates a table for images.",
"Language": null,
"Nature": null,
"Reference": null
},
{
"BodyText": null,
"ExampleCode": "`... | [
{
"Description": "Font rendering library does not properly handle assigning a signed short value to an unsigned long (CWE-195), leading to an integer wraparound (CWE-190), causing too small of a buffer (CWE-131), leading to an out-of-bounds write (CWE-787).",
"Link": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-20... | [
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Integer overflow (wrap or wraparound)",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "PLOVER"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": "Integer Overflow",
"MappingFit": null,
"TaxonomyName": "7 Pernicious Kingdoms"
},
{
"EntryID": null,
"EntryName": ... | [
"92"
] | [
{
"Authors": [
"Yves Younan"
],
"Edition": null,
"ExternalReferenceID": "REF-145",
"Publication": "Student thesis section 5.4.3",
"PublicationDay": null,
"PublicationMonth": "08",
"PublicationYear": "2003",
"Publisher": null,
"Section": null,
"Title": "An overview o... | [
{
"Note": "Integer overflows can be primary to buffer overflows when they cause less memory to be allocated than expected.",
"Type": "Relationship"
},
{
"Note": "\n\n\"Integer overflow\" is sometimes used to cover several types of errors, including signedness errors, or buffer overflows that involve... | [
{
"ContributionComment": null,
"ContributionDate": null,
"ContributionName": null,
"ContributionOrganization": null,
"ContributionReleaseDate": null,
"ContributionType": null,
"ContributionVersion": null,
"Date": null,
"ModificationComment": null,
"ModificationDate": null,
... | Allowed | This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Be careful of terminology problems with "overflow," "underflow," and "wraparound" - see Terminology Notes. Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | [
"Acceptable-Use"
] | [
{
"Comment": "Integer Underflow (Wrap or Wraparound). Consider CWE-191 when the result is less than the minimum value that can be represented (sometimes called \"underflows\").",
"CweID": "191"
}
] | null | [
{
"Description": "The terms \"overflow\" and \"wraparound\" are used interchangeably by some people, but they can have more precise distinctions by others. See Terminology Notes.",
"Term": "Overflow"
},
{
"Description": "The terms \"overflow\" and \"wraparound\" are used interchangeably by some peop... | null | [
"Number Processing",
"Memory Management",
"Counters"
] | null | 1 | [
[
"682",
"190"
]
] | [] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.